SilverNRed Posted September 8, 2004 Posted September 8, 2004 The words Limbaugh and balance should not be uttered in the same breath. He is a fat, drug-abusing hypocrite who preaches moral conservative values, but can't even come close to living his own life in a morally acceptable manner. His talk show has degenerated into non stop name-calling that most kindergarteners would find childish. He has mastered the art of implying things about others without actually leaving himself open to libel. He is manipulating the unintelligent masses with his tripe strictly for his own financial gain and has been doing it for years. He cannot possibly be as ignorant as he appears - he says things that are extremely controversial just for the ratings. He is everything you people say about Michael Moore and then some. 21820[/snapback] Does anyone here actually listen to Limbaugh? Seriously, I haven't wanted to hear a word out of him in years and I haven't. You have to go out of your way to hear what Rush Limbaugh thinks. Michael Moore is all over the place on TV. You can't avoid him. And then you have all our favorite (completely out of touch) celebrities preaching his virtues. Fox News serves its purpose - balancing out the equally biased mainstream media including the New York Times, Associated Press, Boston Globe, CNN, and MSNBC. How can anyone have a problem with Fox News existing. It's another outlet that you can avoid with ease. It has no effect on your life if you don't want it to.
KD in CA Posted September 8, 2004 Posted September 8, 2004 Actually, I'm glad. It gives a chance for more traditional documentaries to get an Oscar. And, of course, the big bonus, we don't have to suffer listening to him at the awards show. 21187[/snapback] By "traditional documentaries" I assume you mean those films that were based on facts and NOT mindless political propaganda?
erynthered Posted September 8, 2004 Posted September 8, 2004 I honestly don't think any of the "big" three will play the movie before the election, no way. Maybe one of the cable stations will pick it up. CNN?
ExiledInIllinois Posted September 8, 2004 Posted September 8, 2004 I honestly don't think any of the "big" three will play the movie before the election, no way. Maybe one of the cable stations will pick it up. CNN? 22223[/snapback] Why? If they were so "liberal" leaning... They would jump at the chance?
erynthered Posted September 8, 2004 Posted September 8, 2004 Why? If they were so "liberal" leaning... They would jump at the chance? 22397[/snapback] Remember the Regan movie? Id say this one's a little more over the top than that one. Maybe Bill Mahrrrrhrrre can host it on a cable channel Kids are good EI, Thanks
ExiledInIllinois Posted September 8, 2004 Posted September 8, 2004 Remember the Regan movie? Id say this one's a little more over the top than that one. Maybe Bill Mahrrrrhrrre can host it on a cable channel Kids are good EI, Thanks 22421[/snapback] Kids always have a more enjoyable time in a snowstorm than a hurricane! I guess there is some redeeming quality for living up here? B)
IDBillzFan Posted September 8, 2004 Posted September 8, 2004 Typical Moore. He's not doing it so it can be aired on TV. He's doing it so he can make a run at Best Picture, not Best Documentary. He is doing this, he says, because he wants the other documentary makers to have a chance. The following is from the OC Register today. Moore pursues Best Picture Oscar for 'Fahrenheit 9/11' Filmmaker decides not to submit the movie in the documentary category. By ANTHONY BREZNICAN The Associated Press Michael Moore says he won't submit "Fahrenheit 9/11" for consideration as Best Documentary at this year's Academy Awards. Instead, he's going for the bigger prize of Best Picture. Moore's critically acclaimed film slams President George W. Bush's war on terror as ill-advised and corrupt. The movie has cheered Democrats but enraged the president's supporters, who booed Moore when he visited the Republican National Convention last week. "For me the real Oscar would be Bush's defeat on Nov. 2," Moore told The Associated Press by phone Monday from New York. The $6 million film has become a sensation that collected $117.3 million in the United States this summer, despite an early roadblock when the Walt Disney Co. banned its Miramax Films division from distributing the political hot-potato. In the midst of the presidential campaign, Moore's announcement is a strategic move for his Oscar campaign. Documentaries and animated films have their own categories, but the conventional wisdom in Hollywood is that those niche awards can limit a film's appeal in the overall Best Picture class. Moore said he and his producing partner, Harvey Weinstein, agreed "Fahrenheit 9/11" would stand a better chance if they focused solely on the top Oscar. He also said he wanted to be "supportive of my teammates in nonfiction film." So many documentaries - such as the gonzo fast-food satire "Super Size Me" and the sober look at Arab television news in "Control Room" - have made the rounds in theaters recently that Moore, who won the Best Documentary Oscar for "Bowling for Columbine," said he wanted to give others a chance. "It's not that I want to be disrespectful and say I don't ever want to win a (documentary) Oscar again," Moore said. "This just seems like the right thing to do. ... I don't want to take away from the other nominees and the attention that they richly deserve." Moore also hinted in a recent interview in Rolling Stone that he would like the movie to play on television before the presidential election. According to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences rules, playing on TV would invalidate its contention in the documentary category, but not for Best Picture. With the movie coming out on DVD Oct. 5, it's not clear whether the TV deal would happen. Nominations for the Academy Awards are scheduled to be announced in January. Regardless of who wins the election, Moore said the film's presence at February's Academy Awards will provide another forum for Americans to think about its message. "The issues in the film - terrorism, the war on terrorism, the Iraq war - will be with us five months from now, sadly," Moore said. "The issues that the film raises will be no less relevant in the new year."
Alaska Darin Posted September 8, 2004 Posted September 8, 2004 Typical Moore. He's not doing it so it can be aired on TV. He's doing it so he can make a run at Best Picture, not Best Documentary. He is doing this, he says, because he wants the other documentary makers to have a chance. 22491[/snapback] That's what I suspected yesterday when I first heard the story. What a surprise.
Kelly the Dog Posted September 9, 2004 Author Posted September 9, 2004 It has zero chance of winning Best Picture. Even in Hollyweird. Even in a bad year for films.
IDBillzFan Posted September 9, 2004 Posted September 9, 2004 It has zero chance of winning Best Picture. Even in Hollyweird. Even in a bad year for films. 22997[/snapback] Funny, I was just talking to my wife about that very thing tonight, but I thought just the opposite. There are no real blockbusters this year...no "Titanic" or "West Side Story." I suspect "The Passion" will get in there, but after that, where do you go? Given the slim pickings and, subsequently, a chance for a drop in ratings, why wouldn't the Academy not ride the fatass to the bank?
SilverNRed Posted September 9, 2004 Posted September 9, 2004 It has zero chance of winning Best Picture. Even in Hollyweird. Even in a bad year for films. 22997[/snapback] Heh, if only. The mov-op-ed-umentary got slobbering reviews when it was released - all basically "Who cares about accuracy? It has an important message!!!!!!!" Also, the reason "Saving Private Ryan" lost Best Picture a few years back was that it was basically hammered by the foreign voters who chastised it as being "too pro-America." Speilberg's shot of the flag waving to open the movie cost him an extra Oscar that year. Imagine that. Tying in what our flag stands for with the sacrifice of the men who died in WWII. How awful. /sarcasm
Cheeseburger_in_paradise Posted September 9, 2004 Posted September 9, 2004 Imagine that. Tying in what our flag stands for with the sacrifice of the men who died in WWII. How awful. /sarcasm Let alone, on that day, at that beach.
DC Tom Posted September 9, 2004 Posted September 9, 2004 Funny, I was just talking to my wife about that very thing tonight, but I thought just the opposite. There are no real blockbusters this year...no "Titanic" or "West Side Story." I suspect "The Passion" will get in there, but after that, where do you go? Given the slim pickings and, subsequently, a chance for a drop in ratings, why wouldn't the Academy not ride the fatass to the bank? 22998[/snapback] Year's not over yet... I think "Passion" gets it, though. I just saw it the other night. Even though it doesn't represent my beliefs...that was one damned powerful movie.
Alaska Darin Posted September 9, 2004 Posted September 9, 2004 Year's not over yet... I think "Passion" gets it, though. I just saw it the other night. Even though it doesn't represent my beliefs...that was one damned powerful movie. 23032[/snapback] Amen
VABills Posted September 9, 2004 Posted September 9, 2004 Year's not over yet... I think "Passion" gets it, though. I just saw it the other night. Even though it doesn't represent my beliefs...that was one damned powerful movie. 23032[/snapback] You have beliefs?
DC Tom Posted September 9, 2004 Posted September 9, 2004 You have beliefs? 23230[/snapback] Yes. For example, I believe you're an a-hole.
tennesseeboy Posted September 9, 2004 Posted September 9, 2004 If nominated for Best Picture, believe me, it will win best picture. This is a weak weak year for film and the Academy would love to give MM main stage. The trick is to get nominated. I don't see much in the way of competition.
erynthered Posted September 9, 2004 Posted September 9, 2004 Is it not a little to early in the morning for Moonshine, there Tenny? You honestly believe that his movie would win best picture?
tennesseeboy Posted September 9, 2004 Posted September 9, 2004 If nominated for Best Picture, believe me, it will win best picture. This is a weak weak year for film and the Academy would love to give MM main stage. The trick is to get nominated. I don't see much in the way of competition. 23266[/snapback] Better than that.. I'll let you go couble or nothing on the grouper you're buying me after the election. If it is nominated in the Best Picture category it will WIN. One it is the best film of the year. Two the voters tend to be quite liberal. Three the voters will love a show, and MM will give it to them. I see it as a can't miss proposition ...the big if is which category it gets nominated in.
erynthered Posted September 9, 2004 Posted September 9, 2004 Better than that.. I'll let you go couble or nothing on the grouper you're buying me after the election. If it is nominated in the Best Picture category it will WIN. One it is the best film of the year. Two the voters tend to be quite liberal. Three the voters will love a show, and MM will give it to them. I see it as a can't miss proposition ...the big if is which category it gets nominated in. 23288[/snapback] That's allot of "IF's"
.thumb.jpg.529869a0a9afd197241cad0932282c97.jpg)
Recommended Posts