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

(21-40 of 79 posts) | Reply

Floor Man writes:
on May 15 2008 01:43 PM

dahluzz, I do honestly apologize if my comment was meant to sound as if I wanted to "bash the people who are actually talking about politics": that wasn't my intention. I could, if you so desire, talk about politics, or even movies, but I'd prefer to talk about both in regards to this article.

(My caps-lock button is fine; my shift button is better. If RT allowed the basic HTML commands in these posts, I'd feel much better equipped to emphasize with them instead of amusedly "yell" with caps.)

Further, I had no intention of "regulating how people are responding". I was simply referring to the tired multitude of posts I've seen in the past that end up straying *completely* from the topic: in this case, the *movie politics*. On that note, I wholeheartedly agree with you; you're absolutely right about the combination of the two being naturally compatible parts of discussion. Assuredly, I'm not surprised that these discussion subjects arose; in fact, that's why I posted what I did. Some (many) of these tangent posts become quite irrelevant.... Given this is, indeed, more about both topics than one, I simply think it'd be more relevant to coherent discussion if both topics were discussed. It's purely my own preference...and just some thoughts, but certainly not intended as an imposition.
:)

Now, to prevent myself from being too much of a hypocrite, I will "contribute" to this discussion. ;)

That being said, I'm very interested to see where Moore takes this.... It seems evident in the highly superior quality of Sicko that he's learned his "don't be overly incendiary" lesson with the "first"(?) Fahrenheit 9/11; I truly wonder if he'll stick to the tone of the first one or refine it a little more intelligently, like he did with his latest. I suppose we'll see if the controversy here is still as "heated" as before....

(Reply to this)

SuperJerkmo writes:
on May 15 2008 02:26 PM

Moore is a film maker. I think people call his films "docs" because they aren't sure what else to call them. They don't really fit into the same category as Lord Of The Rings, or Citizen Kane. Apparently people think that calling it propaganda is bad. Probably because it's been given that stigma by the government.

To me it seems the definition of propaganda film is "it's a film that contains a lot of things that are wrong, and therefore bad". I tend to look at it like "it's a film about one persons opinion about the way something is and/or should be, when you finish watching it you can decide for yourself what your truth is".

I've watched almost every film he's made. I don't own any of them. I think they are by and large entertaining. He makes a lot of good points, he also sensationalizes things, and makes bad points.

I'm pretty sure this will be the same.

(Reply to this)

TheCaptain of TeamLoyalty writes:
on May 15 2008 02:26 PM

Sorry but real scientist know that temperature is on a natural cycle, so while the climate is changing it is NATURAL, no global warming bs, sorry but a vice president that is delussional is not the best source of info. I love how he glosses over the facts in his propaganda movie. Oh yes pollution is bad but to make it out as the cause of all destruction like what gore thinks that is the problem. blind sheep, i laugh every day at you guys.

(Reply to this)

TheCaptain of TeamLoyalty writes:
on May 15 2008 02:28 PM

Sorry but after he lied to talk to Sparticus that proves that he is no different then the nazi propagandists.

P.S. Dahluz i was talking about Somalia, a bigger cluster**** than Iraq, atleast Saddam is dead.

(Reply to this)

SuperJerkmo writes:
on May 15 2008 02:34 PM

I'm pretty sure Al Gore thinks that pollution will be our undoing. He is correct. What people misconstrue is the timetable. This won't kill off humanity in a year, a decade, or even a century, but if we leave it unchecked, and unregulated it will cumulate over time and eventually it will cause of those scary scenarios they make shows about on Discovery.

His cry, and the cry of millions of others is "why not start to stop it now"? It's real easy to cut and run and let another generation handle it "we won't be alive when this crap happens so why should I care" is basically the same thought process that has let pollution get to the levels they are at now.

People seem to think that global warming is going to kill us next week the way they attack it. Nope. It will take thousands of years. I can't fathom why anyone would be adverse to stopping it's progress before it even comes close to being to late.

(Reply to this)

IMAmoose24 writes:
on May 15 2008 02:47 PM

OHHHH NOW I GET IT. So global warming started when bush got in office?

It all makes sense to me now.

(Reply to this)

EmmG389 writes:
on May 15 2008 03:12 PM

Hey Michael, I've got an idea. How about Bowling for Columbine part 2? Considering kids with guns have decided to take out two universities after your film was finished. I'd rather walk through Fallujah than go to college.

(Reply to this)

EmmG389 writes:
on May 15 2008 03:14 PM

Who's going to be your next villain? Charlton Heston? Sorry dude he's dead. Thank god I am graduating in the summer. RT members: Pray for me.

(Reply to this)

gamejediben writes:
on May 15 2008 03:41 PM

Wow! So now Bush is responsible for global warming too?!?! My God, no matter what happens in the world its GOT to be Bush's fault! Lets blame Abu Gharib on Bush. Or maybe the price of Gas! Even 9/11!!!!! Man, Bush has done such a horrible job as president...

The fact is that you give Bush too much credit. He doesn't control any of these things. Congress has far more authority than Bush ever will. But even they don't completely control everything. Its just easier to blame Bush. **** happens! If McCain is president next, when something bad happens, they will say "we should have learned our leason with Bush: Don't trust Republicans!!! Its all the republicans fault!" If Obama becomes president then we will say, "We should have known that a man with only 3 years in the senate for experience was a terrible choice. He's just too young!"

We always blame the president. No matter which party he is in. Take some ****ing responsibility. You are just as much at fault for all of these things. Personally, I didn't notice that much difference between Clinton and Bush. Clinton made just as many mistakes. Its not until 30 or 40 years go by that we see the true impact that these guys had. Then, and only then, can we make any judgements.

Michael Moore is a fool because he thinks his films are telling the truth. In reality, I think we'll be laughing at them 30 years from now... and he probably will be too.

(Reply to this)

-apocolyptic- writes:
on May 15 2008 03:46 PM

Semantics,politics.
Why have an opinion?
Enjoy totalitarism.
Its free!
You to can be stripped of your rights, ideas and thought.
Sign up now.
Everyone has an opinion and it is about the only thing left that is free.
Why is there so much hatred towards anothers opinion?
Does it not fit into your ideal world of what you think or beleive?
If Micheal Moore wants to spew propaganda then so be it.
It is his right, the rights we have fought for, to do so.
If you think his opinion is wrong and disagree with his(free)opinion, then totalitarism is for you.
Control what we think or enjoy the freedom that we are allowed.
You decide.
Debate intelligently, for the mind is a beautiful thing to waste.

(Reply to this)

jelsey writes:
on May 15 2008 03:59 PM

Only One thing to say, "ZEIT GEIST THE MOVIE" Check it out it's mind blowing compared to what Moore has got on bush.

(Reply to this)

TheCaptain of TeamLoyalty writes:
on May 15 2008 04:01 PM

Some scientists have proof that even our pollution has no real effect on global warming and that it will have no effect in the future.

(Reply to this)

CallMeBakes writes:
on May 15 2008 04:17 PM

Bush-bashing is like a drug to liberals. They get some type of high from it, resulting in the long list of things they blame him for which obviously have nothing to do with him (unless he can somehow, miraculously control the weather with his mind, which would provoke a lot of interesting questions). Moore got way high off of his Bush-bashing, got tons of attention for it, tried to go in a different direction, and failed. Now Moore's suffering from withdrawal, so he's got to get on that "wonderful drug" once again.
Answer me this: if Bush was such a terrible president, would all these movies blasting him really be necessary? I believe in letting the facts speak for themselves, and if people feel they need to release movies bashing a president with already low approval ratings, it sure looks like they don't feel confident that history will remember him that way.

(Reply to this)

stoober writes:
on May 15 2008 05:23 PM

Now regardless of your political affiliation, you have to admit that Moore is a brilliant filmmaker. Does he slant thigns? Yes. Does he leave footage out and edit it to make people look bad? Yes. But he also puts footage in his films that people need to see. How many of you saw any real footage of 9/11 or the war in Iraq until you saw Fahrenheit? And the news doesnt cout cuz its all BS.

Love him or hate him, the man is saying something, and thats better than 90% of the people in the world who sit in their living rooms and watch American Idol.

(Reply to this)

Floor Man writes:
on May 15 2008 06:45 PM

(Off-topic):
Why does Fahrenheit not show up in Michael Moore's RT Filmography?

Ironically amusing...or is it amusingly ironic?
;)

(Reply to this)

TheCaptain of TeamLoyalty writes:
on May 15 2008 06:53 PM

Are you insane stoober? Using that logic the nazi propagandists were excellent filmmakers. SOrry but their was no truth in his Fahrenheit 9/11 crapfest.

(Reply to this)

Hoorah writes:
on May 15 2008 08:53 PM

To those who wanted a list of scientists in the shadows AGAINST the belief that humans caused global warming (and that challenge Gore's conception of GW to its very core...):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming

Respectfully put, you will find outside of Michael Moore's and Al Gore's playground, scientists dissent. The reason we don't hear of such disagreement in the scientific community is because those who disagree with its existence lose governmental funding.

"At least one survey of the scientific community has found the opposite problem -- New Scientist notes that in surveys a much larger fraction of U.S. scientists consistently state that they are pressured by their employers or by U.S. government bodies to deny that global warming results from human activities [17] or risk losing funding."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_controversy

Just some food for thought.

(Reply to this)

Lost*Highway* writes:
on May 15 2008 08:54 PM

In reply to this comment (#1736219)
WOW!!! What you belive isn't just wrong, it's scary.

(Reply to this)

DrNvrmore writes:
on May 15 2008 09:26 PM

doc�u�men�ta�ry
1: being or consisting of documents : contained or certified in writing
2: of, relating to, or employing documentation in literature or art; broadly : factual, objective
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/documentary

Let me re-state that my problem with the film is that it is called a "documentary". It is not factual and it is not objective. It should NOT be called a documentary. Many young people (well, the middle aged and old too) that love to jump on the "make-love, not war" band wagon - they go and see this documentary and come out thinking that it is all fact and that MM's opinions are the absolute truth. (That is how he presents his opinions after all - as facts.)

I work for a Unionized Automaker and I talk to these sheep everyday! They would go to Michael Moore church if one existed (and drink the kool ade too). MM submits his movie as a documentary because he wants to dupe as many as possible that his version of events are absolute and true. Trust me it is working and it makes me ill.

I have no problem with the movie being made "YAY FREE SPEECH" but I think it is an injustice to allow it to be called a "documentary". (Or any of his other films.) MM should be brave enough to call his work what it is: propaganda... "the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person"

I'm all for free speech but I might be one of the few that feels that there has to be some responsibility used in conjunction with that great freedom. You can not present information to the American public as fact when it is not. That is the crap that China (and many other countries) do to their citizens. What is the use of having freedom of speech if we allow it to be abused to mislead people?

(Reply to this)

dcipher writes:
on May 16 2008 02:26 AM

In reply to this comment (#1736087)
Um....if simply making things up and outright lying is "genious" then I guess so....

(Reply to this)