Cannes Film Festival

[dean]

Yes, no surprise really, Mike Moore won for Farenhiet 9/11.  From what I've heard it's good, but there were quite a few other good contenders out there.  I guess these choices are always going to be political, and since it's the cool thing to make fun of America nowadays, I guess he was pretty much a shoe-in.

I was however surprised to learn that in America it is getting basically no showings, because noone wants to screen it.  As a non-american I wouldn't mind an explanation, 'straight from the horses mouth', as they say.

Is the film banned or is it just being boycotted and why?

Just an interested party.

[trekgeezer]

Moore had a deal with Disney  and according to what I have read they told him a long time ago they wouldn't distribute it.  He is just yelling about it now to get press because he is in the anti-Bush camp.  It will show if he can find another distributer..

I'm not crazy about Bush or the alternative, but Moore is well known for making facts fit his theories so I would find anything he did hard to swallow. .

Disney doesn't think it would be good for business to run such a film during an election year.  For a private business to do this doesn't constitute censorship, only  the government  could that and if they tried it there would be lawsuits aplenty..

[Mr_Vindictive]

Yeah, Disney doesn't want to jump into releasing an anti-Bush film during an election year.  Miramax REALLY wants to release the flick, but since their parent company is Disney, their hands are pretty much tied.  I think this might be the film to break Miramax and Disney apart though.



I am quite happy to see that Moore's film won Cannes as I am a huge fan of his work.  I know that a lot of people hate him, but you do have to admit he makes interesting and entertaining films.

[trekgeezer]

If you think he is entertaining that's one thing, but he plays real loose with the facts. I actually liked the program he had on Fox a few years back , but lately he really seems to have gone off the deep end.

I would like to know why the Bin Laden family was allowed to fly out of the states  the day after the Trade Center went down, but I would like the facts and not someones  theorizing about  it.

 I'm afraid the state of all the media in the U.S. has gotten to the point  that the extremes are all you hear and those of us in the middle can't get the facts without someone's spin on them.  Objectivity has always been hard to find, but these days it seems to have totally disappeared.

[Eirik]

"If you think he is entertaining that's one thing, but he plays real loose with the facts."

I saw a clip from the movie.  It's a bunch of video clips of Bush fishing and golfing(presumably after 9/11, but with Moore you can't be certain) and campy 80s music playing.  Kind of like implying Nero fiddling while Rome burns I guess?  Whatever.  Like Clinton didn't golf while Serbia and Kossovo and Sudan burned?  Like Roosevelt or Lincoln never kicked back during their wars?  Who cares?

By the way, the reason bin Laden's family members were flown out of the country is because we knew for a fact that they weren't involved (his whole family - which is closely tied to the Saudi royal family - has repeatedly and loudly denounced their youngest son and we watched them like a hawk) and the administration feared for their safety after the attacks.  Bush was also establishing what has been a firm policy of his during this war: No reprisals against the families of terrorists.  I find it a remarkably civilized policy, but I guess Moore disagrees??

Bottom line is that if Bush detained the bin Ladens in this country, Moore would be attacking him for THAT...  Or does anybody really believe he wouldn't?  Moore makes great and sometimes very entertaining polemics, but I'd hardly credit him with the intellectual weight of a real documentary maker.

[jmc]

I've heard they're just trying to fan the flames of controversy to increase publicity and ticket sales when it finally does get released.  I've been reading the book "Down and Dirty Pictures" about Miramax and using controversy to increase interest is a tactic they've used before, though less and less since the Disney affiliation.  They got into trouble with Disney over HAPPINESS, for example.

It sounds like an interesting film, but I'm sure it's like the other Moore films and shouldn't be taken too seriously.   I do give the guy credit for sticking to his guns and making controversial films---it would have been a lot easier to back off and go into a safer, more commercial direction.   One of the film critics on NPR said the main reason it got so much acclaim at Cannes [a 25 minute ovation] has more to do with people's feelings about Bush than it does the film itself.

[The Burgomaster]

Someone should make a documentary about Michael Moore and call it STRAIGHT FROM THE HORSE'S ASS.

[Mr. Hockstatter]

I agree with you entirely on the media.  When a news story comes on, you get all the facts in the first five or ten seconds.  Then it's ten minutes of spin, telling us why something that appears bad is actually good, or something that's good is really bad, depending on who it involves.

[Evan3]

Skaboi wrote:
I know that a lot of people hate him,
> but you do have to admit he makes interesting and entertaining
> films.
>


Thats just Moore's problem. He makes film. Based on fiction with slight  background in historical truth. WHen you make a film, facts slip in favor of speculation and dramatic interpretation.

However Moore claims to be making documentaries. If you want to see an entertaining one, try Ken Burns for mainstream. I dont think Moore should be taking political opinion and using it as fact that is wrong. When even Mel Gibson thinks you are too exxxtreme, that is a BAD sign.

[dean]

"it has more to do with people's feelings about Bush than it does the film itself."

That is pretty true; worldwide opinion of Bush, and therefore America [sorry guys] isn't too high at the moment.  Quite frankly it's cool to poke fun at the US, so it's really small wonder how well Moore went at Cannes.

Does anyone remember the show "That's my Bush" by the guys from South Park?  Although it doesn't reflect what goes on in the real world [by a long shot] I found it really funny because of it's source material [Bush].

[Gecko Brothers]

Mike is loosing it.
a) He hates the rich and corporate even though they fund his projects.
b) He is a very strong socialist. He wants to spend peoples hard earned pay for other people.
c) He ate one two many burgers while watching Super Size Me.

[Eirik]

"b) He is a very strong socialist. He wants to spend peoples hard earned pay for other people."

Yeah, he was on a talk show once when I heard him say that anyone making over $100,000 a year should pay 80% of their income in taxes.  He was gracious enough to include himself.

I made just over $105,000 last year.  Between state, local, and federal taxes, upkeep/payments on a house and two cars, $2000 each for three college funds (really less than you should put away), clothes for five people, food for five people, doctor bills for a wife who had a kid, and all the miscellaneous stuff, we banked a grand total of $500 into the savings account.  We don't drive luxury cars, we didn't go on any vacations, we ate out 12 times all year (once a month), my wife does the cleaning, I do the yard, and our kids wear hand me downs from their cousins.

So when an entertainment industry millionaire who looks like he eats enough to feed my whole family tells me I need to be paying another $30,000 in taxes, you can imagine I hold him in something less than high regard.

"He hates the rich and corporate"

Please.  He IS the rich and corporate.  Radicalism Inc. - shrill and prepackaged for the Starbucks Liberals who drive their SUVs to environmentalist protest rallies and wear leather Timberlands to PETA meetings.

[Gecko Brothers]

You probably heard that on an old Bill O' Rielly interview.

[Eirik]

Don't remember.  Where I work we have three cable news stations playing all the time.  I'm pretty sure I heard it on one of them.  But the amazing thing is he actually said it.

[Chris K.]

Now correct me if I am wrong, but I do recall that the Judges of the Cannes Film Festival were not only Europeans but also American's as well. Most particularly, Moore's film was awarded by none other than...Quentin Tarrentino! Not to sound cynical here, but if true that Tarrentino did support Moore's film then I guess we should be boycotting any Quentin Tarrentino flick here in the U.S.?

Oh and if you want to see REAL documentaries, I suggest the Blue Underground release of THE MONDO CANE COLLECTION. Now those are real documentaries.