ROTTEN TOMATOES: Fahrenheit 9/11 Sequel News Comments

Fahrenheit 9/11 Sequel News

by Scott Collura | May 15, 2008

Summary

The culture wars continue. Inflammatory documentary filmmaker Michael Moore has announced at the Cannes film festival that he is planning a sequel to Fahrenheit 9/11, his acclaimed by some, loathed by others documentary about 9/11. Back to Article

(61-80 of 80 posts) | Reply

TheCaptain of TeamLoyalty writes:
on May 19 2008 06:31 PM

Wait so embarrassing someone is equal to killing someone? Are you insane? Using that logic Abu is the same as the Holocaust. Typical liberal retardedness. Maybe you should learn how to read, he said he is okay with civil unions but he thinks that gays should not have to force religions to marry them, what gays want goes against MY civil liberties. USE SOME COMMON SENSE.

I cant wait for Obama to get elected and run this country even farther into the ground so that i can laugh the liberals. Wait and see a guy who in his short career has ruined the great state of illinois with a bunch of idiotic choices, a man who will raise taxes on us the middle class, a man who will cut and run and sit and allow Iraq to be destroyed, a man who will force gay marriage upon everyone, a man who supports the wholesale murder of babies, a man who supports boarder jumpers taking our jobs and taking money from our system, etc. Liberals are blind. If anything Obama and CLinton are the same, Bush and McCain are nothing alike.

(Reply to this)

bigbrother writes:
on May 19 2008 10:50 PM

In reply to this comment (#1741078)
I think you kinda missed the point of what I was saying. People, generally ones with strong party affiliations one way or another, tend to forget that these laws like in this case separation of Church and State cut both ways. Whereas the church can't tell the govt what to do, the govt has no right to tell the church how to run itself unless it comes directly into violation of one of the govt's laws. You can't force say the baptist church to perform cermonies they feel are not in keeping with their religion.. This is America and in America we have freedom of religion, whether that conforms to our personal belief system or not. If you don't like the basic tenants of any religion you also have the freedom NOT to be a member of that particular sect. Civil unions give everyone the same rights under the law while simultaneously protecting the churches right to govern themselves, anything more than that and it seems to me you're just looking to punish the churches and force them to conform to your own personal dogma and I for one would have no part in that.

(Reply to this)

TombstoneLawDog writes:
on May 20 2008 07:38 AM

gettin' a little far afield from the Moore sequel, but good debate!

Re: Farehnheit, I tend to agree with Stoober; Triumph of the Will is so disturbing partly because it is so effective a piece of cinema. The film itself was a documentary by Leni Riefenstahl about the 1934 Reich Party at Nuremberg, which actually won a number of international awards-- until after the war when it was condemned and Riefenstahl was vilified.

tobasco- the most scathing indictments I've seen against Moore on this film usually involve allegations of ambush interviews (duh- kind of the point) that were unfairly edited and that bit about the government letting Bin Laden's family fly out. There's a movie called 'Farehnhype' supposedly debunking the whole movie that I keep failing to work up the energy to rent..

(Reply to this)

tabascoman77 writes:
on May 20 2008 10:31 AM

"Wait so embarrassing someone is equal to killing someone? Are you insane?"

Ok, Andrew...

Number one, they were more than "embarrassed". They were shocked, beaten, raped, urinated on, and had acid poured on their skin on top of being stripped naked and having photos shot of them. Read the report.

Second, it doesn't matter if none of the above happened and they were just led around naked. The point is...our military is supposed to be ABOVE that behavior.

We don't do that sort of thing.

I expect that kind of behavior from Al Qaeda, not our good troops and I am appalled at their behavior and I REALLY worry for you that you aren't appalled because even George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld were. Both men apologized for it.

"Using that logic Abu is the same as the Holocaust. Typical liberal retardedness."

...ok. What does THAT mean? Are you saying that my line of thinking is somehow like Hitler's? That I shouldn't be upset that our troops abused prisoners of war and that, if I do, that I am somehow justifying some sort of like for the Holocaust...?

Could you be more clear here?

"what gays want goes against MY civil liberties. USE SOME COMMON SENSE."

Wait...explain that...

How do gays getting married interfere with YOUR civil liberties? And, no, that isn't common sense at all. In fact, that makes little to NO sense.

So, what you're saying is that, because black people were granted civil rights years ago, that somehow violated the civil rights of white people?

Explain your rationale, please.

"I cant wait for Obama to get elected and run this country even farther into the ground so that i can laugh the liberals."

Good to know that you're rooting for the country's destruction just so you can continue to hate people.

"Wait and see a guy who in his short career has ruined the great state of illinois with a bunch of idiotic choices,"

Such as?

"a man who will raise taxes on us the middle class,"

Proof?

"a man who will cut and run and sit and allow Iraq to be destroyed,"

It's already destroyed. Why not get out of there and let them cut each other's heads off. Let 'em fight and blow each other up. Isn't our problem.

"a man who will force gay marriage upon everyone,"

EVERYONE? Are you actually saying that Obama is going to force you get married to another man? LOL...

"a man who supports the wholesale murder of babies,"

*Yawn*...you're gettin' a little unhinged here...

"a man who supports boarder jumpers taking our jobs and taking money from our system, etc."

Bad news: it's already happening and it's been happening for years on nearly every single President's watch.

"Liberals are blind. If anything Obama and CLinton are the same, Bush and McCain are nothing alike."

Really?

Then why does McCain support every single major initiative that Bush makes or has made aside from gay marriage being decided by separate states?

(Reply to this)

TombstoneLawDog writes:
on May 20 2008 11:19 AM

Tobasco;

I grant you that picking apart genius' arguments is a fun and easy activity, but if there is one thing that age and experience are begrudgingly teaching me, it is that there are battles worth fighting and battles not, just as there are worthy opponents and the just plain worthless. I would submit, for example, that bigbrother is worthy of the debate based upon his posts.

It is also pretty much beyond argument that 'Andrew' is not worth the time or attention for anything more than one or two amusing exchanges because he is simply too dumb and/or insecure to allow new thoughts to challenge what he already believes. Then again, it seems very clear you know him better than I do. If there is something there worthwhile, I commend your willingness to reach out to it.

(Reply to this)

tabascoman77 writes:
on May 20 2008 11:36 AM

In reply to this comment (#1741716)
BIGBROTHER:

Thanks for your feedback...

"You can't force say the baptist church to perform cermonies they feel are not in keeping with their religion..."

Yes, but there ARE churches that do welcome everybody and anybody to worship. Throw that idea at them. We have a couple of them here in San Jose and I know there are several across California.

Find churches across the country who will do it. It can't be that hard.

"This is America and in America we have freedom of religion, whether that conforms to our personal belief system or not. If you don't like the basic tenants of any religion you also have the freedom NOT to be a member of that particular sect."

I agree, wholeheartedly.

"Civil unions give everyone the same rights under the law while simultaneously protecting the churches right to govern themselves, anything more than that and it seems to me you're just looking to punish the churches and force them to conform to your own personal dogma and I for one would have no part in that."

Wait a second...are you saying that homosexuality is a religious belief?

I know PLENTY of gay men and women that are Catholic/Christian, so how in the world does that change things?

Hate to break it to you...but homosexuality is a SEXUAL PREFERENCE to a pretty good majority of the nation and the world. It's not a RELIGIOUS BELIEF and a church shouldn't be taking the "word" of a gigantic invisible thing in the sky (who may or may not exist) so seriously as to make somebody's preference part of their religious beliefs.

It's just one more reason why I'm not even remotely religious and why I also think that religion can be incredibly dangerous: people let it control their lives and develop hostility towards those who are different from them up to (and including) helping their government outlaw the rights of others.

You know that phrase from "To Kill a Mockingbird" where Atticus Finch tells his little girl, "You don't truly know who a person is until you've jumped inside their skin"?

I think you need to see it from the perspective of somebody who is homosexual and wants to be with the person they love for the rest of their lives.

(Reply to this)

tabascoman77 writes:
on May 20 2008 12:01 PM

In reply to this comment (#1742272)
Tombstone:

I agree. Bigbrother is a good person to argue with even though I don't believe in the stuff that he believes. He actually debates in a clear, concise manner and doesn't resort to cheap shots.

Andrew, I've known here on the boards for a year, I believe.

He used to be "aknddon3". If you ever wanna see the havoc he's created on the boards, just look him up in Google or something.

At this point, though, I'm ready to say to bigbrother that I agree to disagree.

(Reply to this)

TheCaptain of TeamLoyalty writes:
on May 20 2008 06:55 PM

Look at the economy of illinois before obama came into office then after, his decisions led the state into debt. I do not wish harm on the country but i am also a realist unlike tombstone and most liberals i know that Obama will do nothing but ruin the country and the only way for liberals to understand that is for it to happen.

(Reply to this)

bigbrother writes:
on May 21 2008 09:31 AM

In reply to this comment (#1742291)
I think we've come to the common ground we're looking for here. I completely agree if the church(just a generic term for all the varied religious groups that make up our country) want to perform the marriage ceremony I think that's fantastic, but the fact remains that many of them still consider marriage to be a sacred union between a man and a woman. Agree with that belief or not (I personally do not), but they have every right to determine the beliefs of their own religion. The point I'm trying to argue is you can't force people in this case the churches who chose not to allow homosexuals to partake of their religious ceremonies, how to think. That is the danger of govt systems like fascism. You start by doing something that everyone or the vast majority thinks is right and you can quickly fall astray to burning books and telling people what they can eat just as quickly as any religion can. I'm not a gay man and I'm not really concerned about the issue enough to sleep with another dude just to "walk a mile in his shoe's" to find out, so the best I can do is conjecture. If I WAS a gay man I personally think I wouldn't want anything to do with an organization that didn't want me. I would be and am concerned that our govt would deny rights to people because of their sexual preference, I just don't think the sacrement of marriage is a right it's a ceremony to express a belief st forth by a religious entity. The legal benefits cerainly those are rights which shouldn't be denied, and honestly I think if a generation of children grow up with civil unions as the norm it's only a matter of time before the thinking of the religious hierachy's are changed with no need for bloodshed, massive marches and protests or even hurt feelings on either side. maybe that's wishful thinking, but I prefer to think of it as looking to the long term.

(Reply to this)

bigbrother writes:
on May 21 2008 09:36 AM

In reply to this comment (#1742847)
To that point man, look at the state of most of the country before Obama came to office and then after...Was Obama responsible for that? I personally think it has more to do with 9/11, OPEC and the state of the middle east and our standing in the world than the election of one senator from Illinois. The only thing that really concerns me about Obama is the message of hope (Which I actually like) with sometimes a lack of focus on how he's going to make that hope a reality (kinda afraid he'll be a lot of smoke with no fire), but the main campaign hasn't started yet, so hopefully he can allay some of those fears in that time.

(Reply to this)

bigbrother writes:
on May 21 2008 09:37 AM

In reply to this comment (#1742036)
Sorry for branching far afield from Moore, but I've been on here long enough that I've said what I need to say on that point and really don't want to beat a dead horse anymore.

(Reply to this)

tabascoman77 writes:
on May 21 2008 11:37 AM

In reply to this comment (#1742847)
Andrew, I don't know where you're getting your information but Illinois is currently 5th in the nation when it comes to the economy. They have a healthy industrial economy and are a home to Boeing, Motorola, McDonald's, and United Air.

As of 2008, according to their flash index, their economic growth is currently at 102.8, which means that they have grown over the last 4 years. The only time the economy ever took a hit was around the 9/11 terror attacks. Since then, it's gone up 6 points.

So, as much as you would like to see Obama fail, I think that record speaks for itself.

(Reply to this)

tabascoman77 writes:
on May 21 2008 12:15 PM

In reply to this comment (#1742847)
Brother, you're a good debater and good American. :)

I respect your point of view but just want to say something else here:

I'm not telling you to "sleep with another dude" just to get a point of view, I think my point is more like you would probably never know what it would be like unless you were gay.

To me, I don't even see color, creed or preference. I have my friends and family and that's it. I was brought up to treat everyone equally and with great respect.

I have no problem with the beliefs of others, as short-sighted and ignorant as they may be (I have a few of those people in my family, believe me) but I do have a problem with religions not accepting those who are homosexual because, really, that's contradictory of the teachings of Christ. The way I was taught was that God is a loving being who loves all his/her/its children.

The Bible is nothing more than a book of teachings passed down over the years and is no more a holy document then a napkin I used to quickly scribble out a phone number. It's the numbers of believers that make it holy and it's also, unfortunately, the number of believers who misrepresent the things that are said inside it and distort the messages and passages to support their own short-sighted beliefs.

That's why I stay away from religion. I believe there could be something out there and it's nice to believe in fairy tales of great, big, huge things that live in the clouds but I'm a realist. I live my own life, make my own way, and I've done it without praying to a great big deity that watches everyone like Big Brother (no pun intended :) )

I DO encourage those who believe to open their minds and study religious history and you'll see a lot of your beliefs challenged. It's not a bad thing. I think that if the other side of the story was told, we might have a lot of people re-thinking their lives.

But I don't think there will ever be religious harmony in this world. Everyone's beliefs clash and too many "believers" get so passionate that they get violent in defense.

Yes, religion can be a good thing but it's just associated with so much hate.

(Reply to this)

TheCaptain of TeamLoyalty writes:
on May 21 2008 04:07 PM

Go to Chicago and see how good the economy is because of his choices, see how our great public transportation system is almost bankrupt because of his income cuts, etc.

(Reply to this)

bigbrother writes:
on May 22 2008 07:20 AM

In reply to this comment (#1743474)
Yeah, I wasn't serious about the sleeping with another dude comment anyway, just using the absurdity of it for comic value. I can easily see your point of view about religion, but would agree more with your premise if you took it even one step further, religion like almost anything is what you make of it. People who use their faith in God, Allah or Buddha as a means to strengthen their own morality and make themselves generally better people are to be encouraged and lauded for it, just the opposite people who use their beliefs as a means to further their own often twisted agenda's should be looked down upon for it and railed against, but neither belief should color the entire picture.

Thanks for the kind words about my debating skills, but I prefer the term discussion to debate cause to me debate generally means a discussion in which one person tries to prove the absolute truth of his point of view at the expense of someone elses whereas discussion is two people talking in order to discover a common truth thus possibly making both the richer for the discussion. Just submitting to one of my common needs to wax philosophical.

(Reply to this)

tabascoman77 writes:
on May 22 2008 07:21 AM

Andrew, what are you talking about?

Chicago has the THIRD largest Gross Metro Product in the nation as is rated one of the most economically balanced cities in the U.S. due to how diversified it is!

The transportation system not only efficiently transports the city's inhabitants, but also serves as a major hub for just about every major American city by rail.

If you have evidence to the contrary, I would be happy to read what ever sources you can provide.

(Reply to this)

tabascoman77 writes:
on May 22 2008 10:47 AM

In reply to this comment (#1744807)
Yeah, I think this would be a discussion. You're right. I guess I always love a healthy debate and kinda group the two together.

I don't mean to keep going on and on about the whole gay marriage issue...it's just that I can't understand the whole uproar about it. I know the churches and religions have their own belief system but things change. The fact that this country seriously can't get over the private lives of others is just mind-blowing to me.

I'm not for everything the homosexual community does.

For example, some of the gay and lesbian co-workers I see on a daily basis talk about going to gay pride parades and I just have to roll my eyes.

That's the stuff I DON'T get. Not that they don't have the right to do it...but it's really obnoxious and I know for a fact that a lot of gays do it to piss people off rather than to celebrate who they are, which is just a bit annoying as well as a bit arrogant.

If they truly wanted to celebrate being gay or lesbian, they should be marching down the street holding signs, wearing T-shirts, and protesting the government's infringement on their rights because showing up and cross-dressing, and acting like it's dress-up time in la-la-land just accomplishes nothing.

I mean, it's not even Gay Pride anymore. It's the Dress-Up-Like-An-***-and-Act-Like-One-Too-for-the-Simple-Sake-of-Annoying-People Parade.

The whole thing is like a big oxymoron.

That isn't how they dress in their real lives. Many of them work are normal people and seem to have some sense of pride...so what's with the act?

I know I'm straight and us straight people have parades to celebrate holidays and such...but, as far I know, we don't have one to flaunt my sexual preference. Even if we did, I'm would never show up for something like that. I just don't have the ego.

In any case, I'm off my damn soapbox.

About religions...yes, I agree. People DO use their faith to make themselves better and I thought I got that point across. My uncle is one of those people. I don't agree with his insistence that God is involved with everything but his life is better, he's happier, he has a beautiful wife and I'm happy for him.

I just look at how many people take their religions TOO seriously and I have to wince. It's almost like half or over half of the religious population seems to use their religion to support their agendas (whatever it may be). I'm not using actual numbers here but I can't be far off. People are using it to justify war and killing all the time, no matter what religion it is.

In any case, yeah, we agree on all this. Glad that we can reach a common ground here. Sorry to have you keep reading essays. :P

(Reply to this)

bigbrother writes:
on May 22 2008 11:31 AM

In reply to this comment (#1745222)
Yeah, I think it's a self-imposed stigma that a lot of groups put on themselves. They see themselves as outsiders and as the persecuted every day of their lives until it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. They bash people for not being able to accept that which is different, then stow themselves away with people who share the exact same views and lifestyles they do while looking down on all the people that persecute them. These are just general statements of course characterizing some of the negative dangers and of course aren't meant to be taken as criticizing every person who makes those kindof life choices.

(Reply to this)

tabascoman77 writes:
on May 22 2008 02:37 PM

See, and I agree with you there.

I don't respect those who are homophobic or who hate those in the gay community but...

For example, I work with this outrageously gay co-worker. He has the full stereotypical manuerisms and speaks in a VERY feminine manner. I enjoy working with him. He's very nice and I get along with him as I do everyone. He dresses normally and he acts normally a lot of the time.

Thing is, he does the thing on the side where he becomes complete and utter woman. He goes to parades, he cross-dresses, he's like a living samba note in his spare time.

It's completely opposite of who he is in real life. If that's what he is, I mean REALLY is in his life, it's all good...it just seems so immature because I know other gay men who are gay and don't flaunt it and live their lives as any other straight person would.

So, I guess there's two groups of gay people in this world: the ones who are just normal, mature people who go about their lives and the ones who are outrageous, superhero, tights-and-Liza-Minelli-and-Cher gay.

I don't know...I'm not homophobic. I love everyone...it's just I can't imagine doing ANYTHING like that and still having my pride and dignity intact.

(Reply to this)

bigbrother writes:
on May 24 2008 03:27 AM

In reply to this comment (#1745846)
LOL, Yeah it's like "Dude, maybe people aren't making fun of you because you're gay. Maybe they're making fun of you because you're a 40 year old man in spandex and a feather boa." Gay people are great, but I reserve the right to mock people who are as you put it "outrageously gay" just as I reserve that right for people who wear ties and shortsleeves :).

(Reply to this)