Teens banned from Moore's film

Originally posted by Colonel
I saw the film. I almost walked out. It was pornographic violence.

and if jesus had been replaced with a republican you would have been orgamstic about it. in fact you'd come to the theaters with a box of tissues and a credit card so you could stay in the theater all day as if it were a peep show.

its only pornographic as long as it doesnt align itself with your own way of thinking.

Wait!

Why is TC allowed to call Colonel an animal, and PM allowed to call him a homosexual?

Originally posted by mig12
Wait!

Why is TC allowed to call Colonel an animal, and PM allowed to call him a homosexual?

when did i ever call him gay?

unless its a comment that specifically says "the colonel is gay" and has my name next to it then i never said it.

now if you can find such a post, go for it. i know you cant though.

you have a problem with interpretation.

[quoteHe's exposing corruption. Lot better than being treated like a whistleblower usally does.

Gosh darn, I'm going to be late for work!

Colonel, the part of this you still haven't gotten yet is that Moore does NOT EXPOSE CORRUPTION! He is not an insider with information, he is nothing but a liberal with an agenda to push. That does not expose anything, at least not corruption. It does expose the mentality of those who fawn all over this guy.

[edit on 14-6-2004 by Thomas Crowne]

Originally posted by Colonel
I don't know if that's true but if it is...so what? If he can make money exposing the corruption perpetrated on the "average joes" why not then?

If it's true, so what? IF he exposes that and then enjoys that same "corruption" himself, so what? He says big media is biased and way off and then rides around in thier corporate jet?

So what?

So what if I say drugs are bad, and then sell them to your kids?
So what if I say Dr. King was great, and then wear a hood at night and burn crosses on lawns?
So what if I support freedom, and dance that Malcom X got shot?
So what if support the Democrats, and yet voted Bush is in office?
So what if I say gun control is needed badly, and then shoot your mother?
So what if I sex crimes are evil, and then hire some guys to rape your wife?

That is your facts might be wrong and you say "so what"?

That just goes to show that just like Moore, you have no interest in the real truth. You would just rather cling to your retoric and if you're wrong...then so what? See, that is what is called "Hypocrisy". Saying one thing and then doing another or in the full definition "The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess."

You might remember many, many members using that word, "hypocrite" to descibe someone who would call them names but cry foul when he was called a name in return.

You claim Cool Hand is using race? What about Moore saying:

www.newsmax.com...
According to a columnist from the British Independent, Moore described the 9/11 brave-hearts as "scaredy-cats because they were mostly white. If the passengers had included black men, those killers, with their puny bodies and unimpressive small knives, would have been crushed by the dudes." Moore wasn't through embarrassing himself.

So if I said that the slaves were only taken slaves cause they were scared Black men, you would be all over me regarding racism and you know it. That is also an example of "hypocrisy".

Wow, this topic has gotten off track real fast.

I'm not even going to get into the topic of Moore, but as for the NC-17 rating, you'd be hard pressed to make a movie that is MORE graffic than the Passion.

That movie was brutal, and then it went further. I guess we'll all have to wait and see just how nasty it is to tell if it warrents an NC-17 rating.

Ok, you boys go back to playing nice now, ya hear?

Originally posted by KrazyJethro
Wow, this topic has gotten off track real fast.

I'm not even going to get into the topic of Moore, but as for the NC-17 rating, you'd be hard pressed to make a movie that is MORE graffic than the Passion.

That movie was brutal, and then it went further. I guess we'll all have to wait and see just how nasty it is to tell if it warrents an NC-17 rating.

Ok, you boys go back to playing nice now, ya hear?

How about the movie gets a NC-17 rating...so what?
This thread went a bit off topic (although still about Moore)...so what?
You bring up Passion as a brutal movie...so what?

Don't think we're playing nice? So what?

See, the Colonel's argument is great isn't it?

You can go back to your crayola's now Krazy. Just remember to stay inside the lines.

Originally posted by mig12
Wait!

Why is TC allowed to call Colonel an animal, and PM allowed to call him a homosexual?

That is the way of things here, mig12. I take no worries tho.

ZZZ: NO, you have it wrong. Moore doesn't fault people for making money. He faults people for making money while hurting others, i.e. the poor. He faults people for making money while engaging in wrong. For example, he attacked the owner of an senior citizens home for having orderlies physically abusing the residents----anbd it was all on video tape in "The Awful Truth." So, I gues the videotape is lying too.

So, if he gets paid for bringing truth to light, that's wrong too, eh? Let me ask you this? If he didn't earn money from exploiting the the rich (who exploit the poor) how would he be able to bring these truths to light? Magic beans?

Originally posted by Colonel
ZZZ: NO, you have it wrong. Moore doesn't fault people for making money. He faults people for making money while hurting others, i.e. the poor. He faults people for making money while engaging in wrong.

Right...Moore faults people for making money while engaging in the wrong, and I am saying he does the same thing.

Also, I just noticed you had "Public Enemy No. 1" written twice under your name. Does that mean your actually Number 2?

TC: Moore does NOT EXPOSE CORRUPTION? I suggest you rent the videos "The Awful Truth, Season 1 & 2" and then come back to me on that. And you call him a liberal with an agenda to push? What about Druggy Rush? What about Homophobe Savage? What about Killer Scarborough? What about Liar O'Reilly? What about treasonist Novak? What about Baby Hannity? What about Man Coulter? What about Sell out DeSouza? What about....

You mean to tell me that the only people that can push an "agenda" are right wing homophobic thugs? Gimme a break.

ZZZ:What "wrong" has Moore engaged in that deprives people of their homes, their families, kills people, sickens people, hurts people? What wrong is that? Please I'd like to know.

The PE #1 2x is a mistake that I was too lazy to fix.

[edit on 14-6-2004 by Colonel]

Originally posted by Colonel
ZZZ:What "wrong" has Moore engaged in that deprives people of their homes, their families, kills people, sickens people, hurts people? What wrong is that? Please I'd like to know.

How about the lies or the distorted truth? That is wrong too.

In an interview, Jan Jacobson, the woman at this bank shown in the movie, says they were filmed for about an hour-and-a-half during which she explained everything to Moore in detail. But, the way things were presented in the film, Jacobson says, it looks like "a wham-bam thing." She says she resents the way she was portrayed as some kind of "backwoods idiot" mindlessly handing out guns. She says Moore deceived her into being interviewed by saying of their long-gun-give-away program: "This is so great. I'm a hunter, a sportsman, grew up in Michigan, am an NRA member." She says: "He went on and on and on saying this was the most unique program he'd ever heard of." This is the first example of how Moore completely deceives and manipulates his subjects to be made to look stupid in his film. Unfortunately, it is not the last and more unfortunately, an ignorant audience plays patsy to Moore's dishonest depiction.

Jacobson says the movie is misleading because it leaves the impression that a person can come in, sign up and walk out with a gun. But, this is not done because no guns are kept at her bank, although one would think so. She says that ordinarily a person entitled to one of the long-guns must go to a gun-dealer where the gun is shipped.

In fact, despite what BFC wants us to believe, Jacobson says there are no long-guns at her bank. The 500 guns mentioned in the movie are in a vault four hours away. But wait a second... Didn't I see some long guns sitting right there on the rack above her shoulder? Yes - you're not going crazy - those guns you saw (as shown in the picture up the page) are models.

She says that Moore's signing papers in the film was just for show. His immediately walking out of the bank with a long-gun was allowed because "this whole thing was set up two months prior to the filming of the movie" when he had already complied with all the rules, including a background check.

You can read a lot more here: www.bowlingfortruth.com...

Distorted truth? Can you not get long guns by signing up at the bank? Is more not a hunter and a member of the NRA? Admittedly, the bank scene was a bit of an exxageration for political humor but the core truth is right there. I don't see a problem.

Originally posted by Colonel
Distorted truth? Can you not get long guns by signing up at the bank? Is more not a hunter and a member of the NRA? Admittedly, the bank scene was a bit of an exxageration for political humor but the core truth is right there. I don't see a problem.

Stretched truth not a problem.... I KNOW if this was about Bush you would stretch a piece of gum into tire...but since it's not, then you don't see a problem. Yeah, ok...I guess the whole WMD search was just a bit of an exaggeration for a war, but the core truth was there.

You're as open minded and honest as ever!

Note - that last comment was a bit of an exaggeration too.

ZZZ: That was pretty funny. Gum & Tire. LOL.

However, WMD was an outright lie. There was no core truth and people are dying for it right now. Moore never caused the death of anyone.

[edit on 14-6-2004 by Colonel]

Originally posted by Colonel
I agree with the kids. If you are old enough to die on some god-forsaken desert somewhere, you are old enough to drink a beer.

this will probally be the only thig i a gree with you on. since im in the militay and are not old enough to drink.

Hey Colonel, in another thread, you mentioned that you found Primary Colors to be a pretty good film (and I happen to agree, thoug the book was better). Remeber the phone call, where they took a conversation Stanton was having with his aid, and made it into a call to some supposed girlfriend? Those were his words, it was his voice, but the conversation was absolute falsehood. That, in a nutshell, is a Michael Moore film.

Originally posted by Faisca
[

Umm... I assume you're talking about Moore hiring lawyers for Mexicans or whatever...

illegal mexicans? dont illegal alieans have no legal rights in the US?

Wow. Republicans banning Liberal media. Yet Conservative media like Bill O' Reily and others are allowed on national tv? So, if you want to show your opinion, make it one positive about Bush. Hey, had a commercial on radio here, it was banned cause it made fun of Bush. A famous radio show host did thousands if not millions of things that were outrages, but the FCC only banned him after he made anti-Bush comments. And now Moore is being banned for making anti-Bush film. Not very surprising, is it?