F 9/11
- Thread starter kosar
- Start date
............................................................................djv said:
yeh don't get too overjoyed djv.
Kerry could also be made to look like a blubbering idiot if Moore had the time
and inclination.
Scott-Atlanta said:
While there was a little of that, the majority of the movie had nothing to do with cheapshots, etc...
Blogger Jeff Percifield collects blurbs from the same reviewers on Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" and Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11," and the results are often hilarious, as the critics laud Moore for the same reasons they damned Gibson.
A TALE OF TWO MOVIES:
FAHRENHEIT 9/11 vs PASSION OF THE CHRIST
A.O. Scott, New York Times:
F9/11: Mr. Moore's populist instincts have never been sharper...he is a credit to the republic.
Passion: Gibson has exploited the popular appetite for terror and gore for what he and his allies see as a higher end.
Michael Wilmington, Chicago Tribune:
F9/11: Received both the first prize and the longest continuous standing ovation in the history of the Cannes Film Festival and it wasn't because of some cliched French antipathy to America.
Passion: Lacks artistic and even spiritual balance.
William Arnold, Seattle Post-Intelligencer:
F9/11: A masterful job of ridiculing the personality, intellect and employment resum? of George W. Bush ... could well become the docu-equivalent of "The Passion of the Christ" and even affect the presidential election.
Passion: Despite Gibson's claim that he's finally telling "the true story," his movie strikes me as less faithful to the Gospels than the earlier Christ movies. Crammed full of scenes and dialogue and minor characters that he's completely made up.
Jami Bernard, NY Daily News:
F9/11: I was in tears after first seeing "Fahrenheit" at Cannes.
Passion: The most virulently anti-Semitic movie made since the German propaganda films of World War II.
Ty Burr, Boston Globe
F9/11: Should be seen because it takes off the gloves and wades into the fray, because it synthesizes the anti-Bush argument like no other work before it, and because it forces you to decide for yourself exactly where passion starts to warp point of view.
Passion: If you come seeking theological subtlety, let alone such modern inventions as psychological depth, you'll walk away battered and empty-handed
David Edelstein, Slate:
F9/11: After the screening, a friend railed that Moore was exploiting a mother's grief. I suggested that the scene made moral sense in the context of the director's universe, that the exploitation is justified if it saves the lives of other mothers' sons.
Passion: A two-hour-and-six-minute snuff movie?The Jesus Chainsaw Massacre?that thinks it's an act of faith.
[Note: Mr. Edelstein feels this quote misrepresents his review. You decide.]
David Elliott, San Diego Union Tribune:
F9/11: He spends time with a caring, patriotic woman reduced to near-ruin when her son is killed in Iraq. And shows how Iraqi mothers respond, too. Call that "demagogic," if you have an agenda in place of a conscience.
Passion: "Single-mindedness is all very well in cows or baboons," wrote Aldous Huxley, but "(for those) claiming to belong to the same species as Shakespeare, it is simply disgraceful."
Eric Harrison, Houston Chronicle:
F9/11: (Moore) is an indispensable treasure, and his imperfections are part of the reason, because they mark him as real.
Passion: It's awful because everything he knows about storytelling has been swept aside by proselytizing zeal.
J.Hoberman, Village Voice:
F9/11: Let us not forget that Dana Carvey did more than anyone in America, save Ross Perot, to drive Bush p?re from the White House. There are sequences in Fahrenheit 9/11 so devastatingly on target as to inspire the thought that Moore might similarly help evict the son.
Passion: Sitting through the film's garishly staged suffering, one might well ponder the millions of people?victims of crusades, inquisitions, colonial conquests, the slave trade, political terror, and genocide?who have been tortured and killed in Christ's name.
Ann Hornaday, Washington Post:
F9/11: Moore exercises admirable forbearance ... his finest artistic moment.
Passion: Gibson has exhibited a startling lack of concern for historical context.
Mick LaSalle, SF Chronicle:
F9/11: What both exalts the experience and grounds the picture is Moore's essentially patriotic faith that a sincere, invested argument can get a hearing in America.
Passion: The story doesn't make Gibson bigger; he makes it smaller.
Tom Long, Detroit News:
F9/11: A film every citizen of voting age in America should see.
Passion: The feel-awful movie of a lifetime, a filmed bloodletting like no other on record.
Eric Lurio, Greenwich Village Gazette:
F9/11: Every Independent voter should see this movie and vote for Kerry
Passion: A snuff film.
Geoff Pevre, Toronto Star:
F9/11: A plea for America's deliverance ... it may not be an argument one agrees with, and it may be unbalanced and propagandistic, but it is both convincingly argued and sincerely motivated.
Passion: A work of fundamentalist pornography.
Rex Reed, New York Observer:
F9/11: There are multitudes of shattering, seminal moments in his brilliant Bush-whacking documentary.
Passion: A movie that doesn?t say much of anything new. Been there, done that, and you know how it all comes out already.
Carrie Rickey, Philadelphia Inquirer:
F9/11: A magnificent piece of filmmaking.
Passion: The first spiritual splatter film.
James Rocchi, Netflix:
F9/11: None of this is pretty. But it is real, in a way that we rarely get from major news outlets.
Passion: A horrifyingly violent, grisly film about state-sponsored torture and execution.
David Sterrit, Christian Science Monitor:
F9/11: Is the label "documentary" appropriate for this openly activist movie? Of course it is, unless you cling to some idealized notion of "objective" film.
Passion: The highly selective screenplay includes only a few of Jesus' words, spoken in occasional flashback scenes.
Kenneth Turan, Los Angeles Times:
F9/11: Moore makes a persuasive and unrelenting case that there is another way to look at things beyond the version we've been given.
Passion: A film so narrowly focused as to be inaccessible for all but the devout.
James Verniere, Boston Herald:
F9/11: At a time when the film industry is turning out sugarcoated, content-free junk, Moore has given American viewers a renewed taste for raw meat.
Passion: An exercise in sadomasochistic bullying.
Jeffrey Westhoff, Northwest Herald:
F9/11: Moore?s greatest contribution to the national debate is that he pulls back the veil on the bloodshed of a war that has been sanitized for the American public?s consumption.
Passion: The worst thing Gibson has done has been to allow his celebrity to eclipse the film
William Wolf, Wolf Entertainment:
F9/11: Anyone watching it might be stirred in the face of the total picture presented, especially on the mess the nation was misled into in what increasingly been coming apparent as a giant, costly fiasco and a diversion from the real fight against terrorism.
Passion: Gibson has every right to any interpretation he chooses and to make the film he envisions. But the rest of us have the right, and perhaps the obligation, to complain about his narrowly focused, extremely violent, ultimately exploitative personal indulgence.
A TALE OF TWO MOVIES:
FAHRENHEIT 9/11 vs PASSION OF THE CHRIST
A.O. Scott, New York Times:
F9/11: Mr. Moore's populist instincts have never been sharper...he is a credit to the republic.
Passion: Gibson has exploited the popular appetite for terror and gore for what he and his allies see as a higher end.
Michael Wilmington, Chicago Tribune:
F9/11: Received both the first prize and the longest continuous standing ovation in the history of the Cannes Film Festival and it wasn't because of some cliched French antipathy to America.
Passion: Lacks artistic and even spiritual balance.
William Arnold, Seattle Post-Intelligencer:
F9/11: A masterful job of ridiculing the personality, intellect and employment resum? of George W. Bush ... could well become the docu-equivalent of "The Passion of the Christ" and even affect the presidential election.
Passion: Despite Gibson's claim that he's finally telling "the true story," his movie strikes me as less faithful to the Gospels than the earlier Christ movies. Crammed full of scenes and dialogue and minor characters that he's completely made up.
Jami Bernard, NY Daily News:
F9/11: I was in tears after first seeing "Fahrenheit" at Cannes.
Passion: The most virulently anti-Semitic movie made since the German propaganda films of World War II.
Ty Burr, Boston Globe
F9/11: Should be seen because it takes off the gloves and wades into the fray, because it synthesizes the anti-Bush argument like no other work before it, and because it forces you to decide for yourself exactly where passion starts to warp point of view.
Passion: If you come seeking theological subtlety, let alone such modern inventions as psychological depth, you'll walk away battered and empty-handed
David Edelstein, Slate:
F9/11: After the screening, a friend railed that Moore was exploiting a mother's grief. I suggested that the scene made moral sense in the context of the director's universe, that the exploitation is justified if it saves the lives of other mothers' sons.
Passion: A two-hour-and-six-minute snuff movie?The Jesus Chainsaw Massacre?that thinks it's an act of faith.
[Note: Mr. Edelstein feels this quote misrepresents his review. You decide.]
David Elliott, San Diego Union Tribune:
F9/11: He spends time with a caring, patriotic woman reduced to near-ruin when her son is killed in Iraq. And shows how Iraqi mothers respond, too. Call that "demagogic," if you have an agenda in place of a conscience.
Passion: "Single-mindedness is all very well in cows or baboons," wrote Aldous Huxley, but "(for those) claiming to belong to the same species as Shakespeare, it is simply disgraceful."
Eric Harrison, Houston Chronicle:
F9/11: (Moore) is an indispensable treasure, and his imperfections are part of the reason, because they mark him as real.
Passion: It's awful because everything he knows about storytelling has been swept aside by proselytizing zeal.
J.Hoberman, Village Voice:
F9/11: Let us not forget that Dana Carvey did more than anyone in America, save Ross Perot, to drive Bush p?re from the White House. There are sequences in Fahrenheit 9/11 so devastatingly on target as to inspire the thought that Moore might similarly help evict the son.
Passion: Sitting through the film's garishly staged suffering, one might well ponder the millions of people?victims of crusades, inquisitions, colonial conquests, the slave trade, political terror, and genocide?who have been tortured and killed in Christ's name.
Ann Hornaday, Washington Post:
F9/11: Moore exercises admirable forbearance ... his finest artistic moment.
Passion: Gibson has exhibited a startling lack of concern for historical context.
Mick LaSalle, SF Chronicle:
F9/11: What both exalts the experience and grounds the picture is Moore's essentially patriotic faith that a sincere, invested argument can get a hearing in America.
Passion: The story doesn't make Gibson bigger; he makes it smaller.
Tom Long, Detroit News:
F9/11: A film every citizen of voting age in America should see.
Passion: The feel-awful movie of a lifetime, a filmed bloodletting like no other on record.
Eric Lurio, Greenwich Village Gazette:
F9/11: Every Independent voter should see this movie and vote for Kerry
Passion: A snuff film.
Geoff Pevre, Toronto Star:
F9/11: A plea for America's deliverance ... it may not be an argument one agrees with, and it may be unbalanced and propagandistic, but it is both convincingly argued and sincerely motivated.
Passion: A work of fundamentalist pornography.
Rex Reed, New York Observer:
F9/11: There are multitudes of shattering, seminal moments in his brilliant Bush-whacking documentary.
Passion: A movie that doesn?t say much of anything new. Been there, done that, and you know how it all comes out already.
Carrie Rickey, Philadelphia Inquirer:
F9/11: A magnificent piece of filmmaking.
Passion: The first spiritual splatter film.
James Rocchi, Netflix:
F9/11: None of this is pretty. But it is real, in a way that we rarely get from major news outlets.
Passion: A horrifyingly violent, grisly film about state-sponsored torture and execution.
David Sterrit, Christian Science Monitor:
F9/11: Is the label "documentary" appropriate for this openly activist movie? Of course it is, unless you cling to some idealized notion of "objective" film.
Passion: The highly selective screenplay includes only a few of Jesus' words, spoken in occasional flashback scenes.
Kenneth Turan, Los Angeles Times:
F9/11: Moore makes a persuasive and unrelenting case that there is another way to look at things beyond the version we've been given.
Passion: A film so narrowly focused as to be inaccessible for all but the devout.
James Verniere, Boston Herald:
F9/11: At a time when the film industry is turning out sugarcoated, content-free junk, Moore has given American viewers a renewed taste for raw meat.
Passion: An exercise in sadomasochistic bullying.
Jeffrey Westhoff, Northwest Herald:
F9/11: Moore?s greatest contribution to the national debate is that he pulls back the veil on the bloodshed of a war that has been sanitized for the American public?s consumption.
Passion: The worst thing Gibson has done has been to allow his celebrity to eclipse the film
William Wolf, Wolf Entertainment:
F9/11: Anyone watching it might be stirred in the face of the total picture presented, especially on the mess the nation was misled into in what increasingly been coming apparent as a giant, costly fiasco and a diversion from the real fight against terrorism.
Passion: Gibson has every right to any interpretation he chooses and to make the film he envisions. But the rest of us have the right, and perhaps the obligation, to complain about his narrowly focused, extremely violent, ultimately exploitative personal indulgence.
Turf,
Is there any reason why somebody would expect reviews of those two films to be similar, any more than any other two movies?
A lot of the so-called contrasts have comments about the violent nature of Passion. While F 9/11 had little if any violence, Passion was among the most brutally violent films ever made. It seems pretty obvious that reviews would be different on that subject.
Is there any reason why somebody would expect reviews of those two films to be similar, any more than any other two movies?
A lot of the so-called contrasts have comments about the violent nature of Passion. While F 9/11 had little if any violence, Passion was among the most brutally violent films ever made. It seems pretty obvious that reviews would be different on that subject.
Blogger Jeff Percifield collects blurbs from the same reviewers on Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" and Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11," and the results are often hilarious, as the critics laud Moore for the same reasons they damned Gibson.
Yeah, I caught that the first time. There are 22 'examples' that he gave. Can you point to one where they laud Moore for the same thing they bash Gibson for? An example that has nothing to do with the fact that they are different movies and subject to different opinions?
wned: :142lmao:Bravo Turfgrass! Encore, Encore! Stupendous, no marvelous. Excellent. Speech Speech! *throws rose petals in the air* Magnifico!
Last edited:
I'm sorry Kosar, If you can't find even one example in the above reading you are above reproach.
He did say that the results are often hilarious. When you get a chance, why don?t you post those.
Q:Why do birds fly south for the winter?
A: Because elephants aren?t pink
:142lmao: :142lmao: :lol2 :lol2 :lol2 :lol2 :142smilie :142smilie
Q:Why do birds fly south for the winter?
A: Because elephants aren?t pink
:142lmao: :142lmao: :lol2 :lol2 :lol2 :lol2 :142smilie :142smilie
Turfgrass said:
I guess i'll take that as a no. Did you even read the 'blurbs'? If that's the point of that guy collecting quotes, he's not doing a very good job. He simply found 22 reviewers that liked F 9/11 and didn't like Passion. Hilarious.
William Wolf, Wolf Entertainment:
F9/11: Anyone watching it might be stirred in the face of the total picture presented, especially on the mess the nation was misled into in what increasingly been coming apparent as a giant, costly fiasco and a diversion from the real fight against terrorism.
Passion: Gibson has every right to any interpretation he chooses and to make the film he envisions. But the rest of us have the right, and perhaps the obligation, to complain about his narrowly focused, extremely violent, ultimately exploitative personal indulgence.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kosar, how about Mr Wolf knocking Gibson for his narrowly focused and ultimately exploitative personal indulgence. Don't you think if Mr. Wolf was being honest he would of applied these criticisms to Moore also...
F9/11: Anyone watching it might be stirred in the face of the total picture presented, especially on the mess the nation was misled into in what increasingly been coming apparent as a giant, costly fiasco and a diversion from the real fight against terrorism.
Passion: Gibson has every right to any interpretation he chooses and to make the film he envisions. But the rest of us have the right, and perhaps the obligation, to complain about his narrowly focused, extremely violent, ultimately exploitative personal indulgence.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kosar, how about Mr Wolf knocking Gibson for his narrowly focused and ultimately exploitative personal indulgence. Don't you think if Mr. Wolf was being honest he would of applied these criticisms to Moore also...
Blitz said:
Blitz,
Thanks. I think we would all agree that Moores film is narrowly focused and a personal indulgence, but whether it's exploitative is debatable. But besides that, now we're(apparently-as obviously the whole review isn't posted) talking about omissions and not what the supposed point to this is. And that's that he's lauding Moore and bashing Gibson for the same thing. That's not true. Just because he possibly omitted 'narrowly focused' from his review is not really that strong of a case for bias. Without seeing the whole reviews, all we can go by is comments that he cherry-picked, and even at that, I still can't find an example of where any of these guys bash Gibson and praise Moore for the same thing.
kosar said:
Now all of a sudden 4 of the 6 theaters that 'boycotted' it around here, including Regal, suddenly started showing it yesterday. I guess making a stand is a lot easier with a movie that isn't making any dough.
Just provin how Republican Republicans are. Profits before principle. Republican motto. Seems to fit. American troops in Iraq but none in Sudan. Wonder why? (The following dittie shoud be sung to that old Irish tune Harrigan) H..........A..........double L I, B-U-R-T-O-N spells Halliburton.
Ed
Ed
Eddie
"Profits before principle"
_______
Remeber Ronald Reagan and his first week out of office? During the Reagan years there was an incredible trade deficit with Japan. During Reageans last year(s) there was proposed legislation on laws that would require japan to give equal opportunity to USA goods. The bill was written and passed by congress awaiting final signing by Ronnie. He vetoed the bill. His first week out of the office he visited Japan and received a couple million for a ten minute speach (bribe money). He had the $$'s in his back pocket faster than you can say 'laid off factory worker'. It's always been about profits for the compassionate conservatives. Always.
"Profits before principle"
_______
Remeber Ronald Reagan and his first week out of office? During the Reagan years there was an incredible trade deficit with Japan. During Reageans last year(s) there was proposed legislation on laws that would require japan to give equal opportunity to USA goods. The bill was written and passed by congress awaiting final signing by Ronnie. He vetoed the bill. His first week out of the office he visited Japan and received a couple million for a ten minute speach (bribe money). He had the $$'s in his back pocket faster than you can say 'laid off factory worker'. It's always been about profits for the compassionate conservatives. Always.
we are supposed to take care of sudan,now?......where is kofi anan?.....must i repost my scathing explanantion on why the u.n. is again sitting on it`s hands as people die in the sudan.....
and it had better be profits before principle for any american politician....our leadership is responsible to u.s. citizens....not the sudanese.....
but,i see powell is now drawing a line in the sand.....
just fire anan....what a piece of garbage....
i see the word "owned" bandied about.....anan is owned.....
and it had better be profits before principle for any american politician....our leadership is responsible to u.s. citizens....not the sudanese.....
but,i see powell is now drawing a line in the sand.....
just fire anan....what a piece of garbage....
i see the word "owned" bandied about.....anan is owned.....
Last edited:
Only sure thing that has been obvious is conservatives have been adamantly questioning it--the liberals-aljazeera and yesterday Hezalah (spl) climb aboard with their endorsement.Now,what can one draw from that conclusion?
P.S. I would not be surprised to see Saddam throw in an endorsment either as his analysis of Bush and Coalition pretty much mirrored the above.
P.S. I would not be surprised to see Saddam throw in an endorsment either as his analysis of Bush and Coalition pretty much mirrored the above.
