TomAiello 26 #51 September 7, 2004 Would you consider Leni Riefenstahl's Triumph of the Will to be a documentary? It used only "real" footage (not sure exactly what the definition of "real" is in this context).-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #52 September 7, 2004 Hey Bill, I think you got it all wrong.. The only one that is gaining political advantage here is MM. You make like it or not, but having seen his previous work and the political tone embodying this film. Having been praised by the French, I find it suspicious and in accordance to my thoughts, that MM instead of going ahead with trying to get it nominated, he hides from that. Just like his interview, nothing of substance to report or face the questions and answer them concisely. He prefers to smear, and go the "IS BUSH FAULT, WOULD YOU SEND YOUR KID TO HIS DEATH? answer."According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #53 September 7, 2004 QuoteI realize that it would be very advantageous to define it as a non-documentary, but when I hear people who have never seen it try to change its genre so they can get some political advantage, I find it hard to take them seriously. that's awfully snarky, Bill. I have zero personal advantage in whether or not it is called a documentary, or a fictionalized film. As for political advantage, I don't see one, unless you mean the democratic party's advantage. And as for me trying to "change it's genre," I haven't the power to do so, and so find little use in worrying about it. If you don't want to take me seriously, fine. Don't. But I am still allowed an opinion, and, thankfully, my opinion doesn't need your approval to be valid. It is valid on it's face. Now, as for using actors, does that mean that if I set out to make a documentary, I can't use actors? What about where the Academy states that re-enactment can be used...that means "actors." So that doesn't wash with your objection. Bill, you're an avid reader. Have you made it through all 585 (or so) pages of the 9/11 Commission report? That, to me, is far more factual, far more unbiased than MM's documentary. For you, Bill, to take MM's word as truth without researching it and being intellecutally honest about it is very disappointing to me. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #54 September 7, 2004 BWAWAWAWAW...Tom you cracked me up. Most have acknowledge that MM is not honest about his message, and still defend a work as "documentary". Well, let me go to the library and then get some of Goebbel's documentaries, they might as well teach me a thing or two..."According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,118 #55 September 7, 2004 >The only one that is gaining political advantage here is MM. If he were running for president, that might be a good point. >He prefers to smear . . . That seems to be a requirement for commentators on both sides lately. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,118 #56 September 7, 2004 >If you don't want to take me seriously, fine. Don't. But I am still allowed > an opinion, and, thankfully, my opinion doesn't need your approval to be > valid. Of course. Plenty of whuffos have very strong opinions about skydiving; yet people who have done it tend to have more valid opinions. I tend to give people who have actually seen a movie more credence than those who have only third-hand information about it. I suspect you are the same way; I suspect you'd tend to take an experienced skydiver's opinion on safety in skydiving over a whuffo's - although you might well listen to both. >Bill, you're an avid reader. Have you made it through all 585 (or so) pages >of the 9/11 Commission report? That, to me, is far more factual, far more > unbiased than MM's documentary. Read about 100 pages of it. I agree, there is good stuff in there. >For you, Bill, to take MM's word as truth without researching it and being > intellecutally honest about it is very disappointing to me. I did a lot of that research before I saw the movie. Most of the stuff was not a suprise to me. I had seen the video of him sitting there for ten minutes with an unfortunate look on his face well before seeing Moore's version of it, and I had seen several interviews with Iraqis before our invasion that lent credence to his portrayal of them. It was clear that he had an agenda; the whole "stealing the election" thing was a tired re-portrayal of the whole election scandal. The most valuable parts of the movie were, to me, the interviews with soldiers, Iraqis and Americans who had lost their children to the war. I am glad their opinions got a forum. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #57 September 7, 2004 QuoteMorning, Bill. Quoteunless you claim it wasn't about Bush you'd be hard-pressed to claim that it was fictional Not really true. Consider: JKF (by Oliver Stone) The Messenger The Exorcist 12 Angry Men Silence of the Lambs (About a million other movies I could name) And so on. Not one of those above I consider "fact," while they were all heavily based on real events. They were fictionalized. This movie is in the same genre, which moves it out of the realm of non-fiction. Ciels- Michele So, who played George W. Bush in the movie? Who wrote his lines?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #58 September 7, 2004 QuoteQuoteMorning, Bill. Quoteunless you claim it wasn't about Bush you'd be hard-pressed to claim that it was fictional Not really true. Consider: JKF (by Oliver Stone) The Messenger The Exorcist 12 Angry Men Silence of the Lambs (About a million other movies I could name) And so on. Not one of those above I consider "fact," while they were all heavily based on real events. They were fictionalized. This movie is in the same genre, which moves it out of the realm of non-fiction. Ciels- Michele So, who played George W. Bush in the movie? Who wrote his lines? I guess it would depend on who was edditing the lines, if you edit in a way that illudes from the real meaning and shifts into spin mode - I would say that MM wrote the lines - he fabricated the script from sound bites he acquired.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #59 September 8, 2004 Turtle... you haven't learned yet? If you take things out of context and it's against Bush, then it's okay... but if you take things out of context and it's against Kerry, then it's baaa-aaa-aaaadMike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
