This is something that even Bowling for Columbine couldn't do. It looks like Moore will be back in the limelight again this year.
But the real question is, can a documentary influence the elction?
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Most likely not. People will only say he is lying or exagerating. I am curious to see this.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Who are the judges for the Canne Film Festival?
Posted by Xaposert (Member # 1612) on :
I think they change. But I know the head judge this year was Quentin Tarantino.
Posted by Zamphyr (Member # 6213) on :
Tarantino was group President this year. Other judges:
Benoît POELVOORDE, (Belgium) Emmanuelle BEART, (France) Jerry SCHATZBERG, (US) Kathleen TURNER, (US) Peter VON BAGH (Finland) Tilda SWINTON, (UK) Tsui HARK (Vietnam)
Posted by ssywak (Member # 807) on :
You see that?!? Do you get it?!?
Foreigners! Almost three-quarters of 'em are Foreigners!
Of course they hate us!* And look--they've even got the FRENCH there! It's so biased!
(* Actually, they don't hate "us." They hate "you." I'm a liberal.)
Posted by kerinin (Member # 4860) on :
he he he Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
I'll just say that F-9-11 would have to be a substantially different piece of media from Moore's other pieces of...media...to be worth its salt.
Posted by Xaposert (Member # 1612) on :
Well, if it can be as good as Bowling For Columbine, it will be more than worth it's salt. That film was quite powerful - and won an Oscar to boot.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
Oooh, if it won an Oscar it must be good. It's got to be at least 1/11 as good as Titanic .
Posted by A Rat Named Dog (Member # 699) on :
After hearing some of the allegations that Fahrenheit 911 makes, my initial reaction is, he'd better show me some damn evidence Bowling for Columbine had its good, thoughtful bits, and its outlandishly prejudicial and obnoxious bits. I'm concerned that the past few years have pissed Michael Moore off to the degree that his next film might be heavier on the latter.
Posted by plaid (Member # 2393) on :
Roger Ebert gave it a good review, and said it's generally more serious than his other films:
quote:Michael Moore the muckraking wiseass has been replaced by a more subdued version in "Fahrenheit 9/11," his new documentary questioning the anti-terrorism credentials of the Bush regime....
But the film doesn't go for satirical humor the way Moore's "Roger & Me" and "Bowling for Columbine" did. Moore's narration is still often sarcastic, but frequently he lets his footage speak for itself....
After the first press screening on Monday, journalists noted on their way out that Moore was more serious in this film and took fewer cheap shots. But there are a few.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)