Fahrenheit 9/11 trailer

Is that so?Then you believe what he showed in his movie or what he said in front of public and got criticized arent his actual beliefs?
Do yoy think its logical to work and not expect money?The only and great difference is that he expressed his beliefs and history on things America and didnt care about being criticized or even make people fight him.
Even if he didnt do it solely for money (and who doesnt work for a living) you woulld still say the same thing.

Lets take a different approach of the discussion then.Ignore who made it, ignore why he made it.Do you agree with the things said, shown and told?

Thats what it comes down to for the most part. WHo makes what and how they promote it. Unless there is nothing but blatant lies.

I suppose you would all like him to be a monk and write books and direct movies for free.  The issue is NOT whether he is compensated for his work, or even HOW MUCH compensation he receives.  

As I recall, the question is whether he\'s only in it for the money.

After he released "Roger and Me" to great success in the United States, he could have pursued another more comfortable, and by no means less lucrative career as a conventional hollywood director.  He CHOSE not to, and instead continued to produce books, television shows, and movies that challenge the status quo and corporate power structure in this country.  Now he receives death threats from pinheaded reactionary conservatives, struggles to get his books published, and his movies released, and has to endure endless attacks and abuse from narrow minded politicians and pundits who can\'t be bothered to listen to what he\'s saying.

Yup, that sounds like the actions of someone who\'s "only in it for the money."  I can\'t believe I had to spell it out for you.

OK, now what\'s your explaination for why he\'s only in it for the money?  I hope it\'s something better than "dude\'s rich."  :rolleyes:

[videoholic]

Actually you are the one who brought up the fact that he doesn\'t do it for money.

Luke brought up the point that he blasts america in all of his movies yet he certainly doesn\'t mind making the money from the Americans who watch his rhetoric.

Kind of like the Muslims who flew the planes into the WTC towers.  They went to strip bars when they were living in Ft. Lauderdale.

And the dude\'s rich comment was just a joke.  It\'s just that you say there is no evidence he\'s doing it for the money, when there really is much less evidence that he\'s not.

I don\'t like the man, but anyone who rags on G.W.B. gets a thumbs up from me.

Freelance journalist M�rten Blomkvist has done us all a service [Dagens Nyheter, June 2] by phoning Ray Bradbury, author of the classic dystopian novel Fahrenheit 451, to find out what he has to say about Michael Moore toying with his title. Moore recently walked away from Cannes with the Palme d�Or for his anti-Bush film Fahrenheit 9/11. Is Bradbury, now 84, flattered by the reference? Well, not quite: Michael Moore is a stupid son of a bitch. He stole my title and changed the numbers and never asked for my permission.

Bradbury explains that he tried to get in contact with the director. Moore was busy and promised to get back to him that same afternoon�but he never did.

He is a dreadful man. A dreadful man.

Bradbury sees Moore�s appropriation of Fahrenheit as a simple case of theft: I could write a novel tomorrow called Gone with the Wind, couldn�t I? But I�m not going to do it because that would be dishonest. Lets just say that Michael Moore is dishonest and that I want to have nothing to do with him. That pretty well does it.

http://spectator.se/stambord/index.php?p=24

There was a released Novel in bookstores with the same name and nobody knew it?

btw:Is there a transalted interview?

Originally posted by videoholic
Actually you are the one who brought up the fact that he doesn\'t do it for money.

Luke brought up the point that he blasts america in all of his movies yet he certainly doesn\'t mind making the money from the Americans who watch his rhetoric.

Kind of like the Muslims who flew the planes into the WTC towers.  They went to strip bars when they were living in Ft. Lauderdale.

And the dude\'s rich comment was just a joke.  It\'s just that you say there is no evidence he\'s doing it for the money, when there really is much less evidence that he\'s not.

I gave you a reasonable explanation for why he\'s not just doing it for the money.  You haven\'t given me a reasonable explanation for why he is.  Therefore your point about the "evidence" makes no sense.  As I suggested before, there is no evidence on either side of this argument because the explanation for Moore\'s motivations is contained only in his head.  You can only make an assertion about his motivations based on his actions, and that\'s what I\'ve done.  Your only assertion is that he\'s well paid.

Regarding the other point:  You and others have stated that Moore "blasts America," suggesting perhaps that he hates the United States.  If you read his books and watch his movies, you\'ll see that he blasts CORPORATE America, the US electoral system, our two party structure, and other offenses of the rich exploiting the poor.  It\'s called constructive criticism.  I have no idea why this indicates to you that he\'s not entitled to benefit from the profits generated by a work that he made.

Only another week b4 Broadband comes

In relation 2 being able to watch trailers =]

ps2.... trailer is offline right now anyway.

Ohhhh...Fahrenheit 9/11 and Fahrenheit 451...big deal.

Hey arent writers seeking money too btw?

WTF

"Fahrenheit 9/11 and Fahrenheit 451"

Unless both talk about people burning books in the future, I don\'t see what the problem is.

exactly.(which Im assuming F-9/11 doesnt.)

Its a play on words... Moore chose the title because of the book named that - it doesn\'t mean the topics have to be anything alike.  I don\'t see the problem.  

In regards to the movie - just Moore pulling the same stunt of trying to stretch the truth as far as he can.