Michael Moore Making Fahrenheit 911 Sequel

[Begbie]

http://www.variety.com/VR1117985577.html

Michael Moore Making "9/11" Sequel
by Pamela McClintock, Anne Thompson

Michael Moore is making a sequel to "Fahrenheit 9/11" for Overture Films and Paramount Vantage, which will shop the project to international buyers when the Cannes Film Festival and market get under way today.The two companies are co-financing and co-producing the untitled doc, which will be released next year. Overture will distribute the film domestically, while Vantage will handle international.
Moore may be leaving the Weinstein Co. -- where he made his last two films, including "Fahrenheit 9/11" -- but Overture and Vantage are no strangers to the filmmaker. Overture CEO Chris McGurk and chief operating officer Danny Rosett were both at MGM and United Artists, home of Moore's "Bowling for Columbine."
Moore also knows Vantage topper Nick Meyer, former president of Lionsgate's international arm. Lionsgate teamed with Bob and Harvey Weinstein and distributed "Fahrenheit 9/11" after Disney refused to let Miramax do so. Lionsgate again teamed with the Weinsteins to distribute Moore's most recent docu, "Sicko."
"Fahrenheit 9/11," a scathing indictment of George W. Bush's war on terrorism and a hit at the worldwide box office, won the coveted Palme d'Or at Cannes in 2004. "Bowling for Columbine" also played at Cannes, and "Sicko" preemed at the fest last year.
Moore's new doc could play at Cannes next year, if it isn't released earlier in the spring. He's already at work on the film.
"Clearly, we have a movie of global appeal here. Michael Moore is a very talented filmmaker, and this is a branded property," Meyer said, adding that the Weinsteins helped build that brand.
Sequel will pick up where "Fahrenheit 9/11" left off. In the time since, Bush's popularity has plummeted, while the Iraq war continues and the economy falters.
"It's a vote of confidence on Michael's part and a great partnership for all of us," Rosett said. "There is a voracious appetite for this kind of commentary."
Moore has made three of the five top-grossing documentaries of all time. "Fahrenheit 9/11" is the highest-grossing docu ever domestically, earning $119.1 million. It grossed another $100 million at the international box office.
Moore's decision not to make his next film with the Weinstein Co. comes after "Sicko" failed to ignite at the box office. Film, which took on the U.S. health care system, grossed $24.5 million domestically and $11.2 million internationally. Topically, the film didn't resonate with overseas auds.
Deal strengthens the relationship between Vantage and Overture. Last year, the two entered into an exclusive international distribution deal that gives Overture access to Vantage's international sales division, as well as the distrib arm of Paramount Pictures Intl.
Vantage will likely keep distribution rights to certain overseas territories after selling off the rest.
Bob and Harvey Weinstein will get an exec producing credit.


Definition of the term "Documentary" -
1. Consisting of, concerning, or based on documents.
2. Presenting facts objectively without editorializing or inserting fictional matter, as in a book or film.

How, oh how could he have made 3 of the top 5 grossing "documentaries" when they're full of inaccuracies and not actually documentaries?

But have no fear, a whole sequel is now in the works after Moore's disgust with the poor performance of Sicko.

Die motherfucker, die.

[maz]

michael moore is a Cunt

Oh wait
That's bubba

No, It's Both

[VMS]

News at 11: McCain guaranteed a win now?

I've said it before on here: Michael Moore getting involved in your political movement and making a propagan... errrr... documentary promoting it is pretty much a guarantee it'll be a giant failure.

Roger & Me, Bowling for Columbine, Fahrenheit 9/11, have all clearly been colossal failures in changing things. It's too soon to tell with Sicko, and obviously too soon for an F9/11 follow-up.

[MrBogey]

Moore should throw himself off a cliff considering he's the guy who wins elections for Bush.

Everytime he pulls his porcine self out of his recliner to make the most inane and factually disproven statements he acts like a lightning rod. Opponents of Republicans just can't seem to distance themselves and so far only a quarter of Americans reliably fall for his stupidity while the rest reject it outright.

He thinks he's so sly trying to intimate that the NRA was founded by the KKK.

[Ballbuster1]

I saw a license plate on the front of one of my customer's cars that said it all:

"Micheal Moore is a fat ass"

[VMS]

He thinks he's so sly trying to intimate that the NRA was founded by the KKK.

Intimate? Dude fucking outright said it. Which is funny, considering the NRA was founded by two Union generals, who weren't exactly interested in joining an organization in the South founded by a Rebel general...

[THE FEZ MAN]

i hate to say it, but i have seen all of his "films" i dont agree with some of the things that he say's but i do kind of like them. we need assholes like him, i just wish there was a little more balance within "the system" it would be nice for a less radical type of person to present a little less bias view on some of the same subjects. but that will never happen.... i blame the jews

[MrBogey]

Intimate? Dude fucking outright said it. Which is funny, considering the NRA was founded by two Union generals, who weren't exactly interested in joining an organization in the South founded by a Rebel general...

I'm being kind. He only showed a cartoon where klansman took off their hoods and joined the NRA. He ALWAYS weasels with technical arguments (ie- "I didn't <i>say</i> that such a thing occured")

[Taso]

i blame the jewsI concur

[Vyce]

i hate to say it, but i have seen all of his "films" i dont agree with some of the things that he say's but i do kind of like them. we need assholes like him, i just wish there was a little more balance within "the system" it would be nice for a less radical type of person to present a little less bias view on some of the same subjects. but that will never happen.... i blame the jews

No we don't fucking "need" him. If the guy had ANY sort of objectivity and wasn't a complete hypocrite, maybe he'd have some uses, but he isn't, and he doesn't.

[THE FEZ MAN]

No we don't fucking "need" him. If the guy had ANY sort of objectivity and wasn't a complete hypocrite, maybe he'd have some uses, but he isn't, and he doesn't.


yea that constitutional right to express him self should be stripped........ :icon_roll

[thetick130]

yea that constitutional right to express him self should be stripped........ :icon_roll

Yeah, thats exacly what he ment. :arrrh:

[WhiteHonkyDevil]

yea that constitutional right to express him self should be stripped........ :icon_roll

Don't be an ass. We know he's got the 'right', but he certainly shouldn't be passing himself off as a 'documentarian'

[Vyce]

yea that constitutional right to express him self should be stripped........ :icon_roll

And I said he should be stripped of his 1st amendment rights.......where exactly?

You said we "need" people like Moore. As ENTERTAINERS, maybe, if his brand of schtick is your cup of tea, but as a documentarian or journalist or whatever he or his fans fashion him to be that isn't what he really is (which is a propagandist and a political pundit somehow even less rational or intelligent than the likes of Ann Coulter), no, we don't.

He's an ass. I don't suppose I would mind him so much if the elaborate FICTIONS he presents as "documentaries" weren't fervently believed by so many people here at home or abroad, but alas, that's not the case.

[Fr. Dougal]

I hope Michael Moore's cancer gets AIDS.

[BloodyDiaper]

Moore describes his films as "cinematic op-eds" so he's upfront about his bias. Nobody goes to one of his movies expecting fairness or objectivity anymore than people tune into Limbaugh or Hannity expecting the same.

[Vyce]

Moore describes his films as "cinematic op-eds" so he's upfront about his bias. Nobody goes to one of his movies expecting fairness or objectivity anymore than people tune into Limbaugh or Hannity expecting the same.

Yes, but unfortunately, as with Limbaugh and Hannity, there are plenty of folks who treat his editorial opinions as the gospel truth, or at least will endlessly parrot his take on politics and society.

[MrBogey]

Moore describes his films as "cinematic op-eds" so he's upfront about his bias. Nobody goes to one of his movies expecting fairness or objectivity anymore than people tune into Limbaugh or Hannity expecting the same.

So when can Limbaugh expect accolades for his propagandizing from Cannes?

[BloodyDiaper]

So when can Limbaugh expect accolades for his propagandizing from Cannes?

As soon as Michael Moore is named #1 by the Talkers Magazine editors.

[MrBogey]

As soon as Michael Moore is named #1 by the Talkers Magazine editors.

I know you're inferring that Rush isn't a filmmaker but that's really irrelevent as my point was that Moore gets accolades for his "exposing the truth" from people who are supposedly unbiased.

Rush runs an editorial talk show. Moore makes documentaries. One lies the other opines.

[BloodyDiaper]

I know you're inferring that Rush isn't a filmmaker but that's really irrelevent as my point was that Moore gets accolades for his "exposing the truth" from people who are supposedly unbiased.


There is no Cannes award for “exposing the truth” nor is there a requirement to be politically unbiased to sit on the Cannes jury.

Rush runs an editorial talk show. Moore makes documentaries. One lies the other opines.

Moore makes self-described “cinematic op-eds” – they are both in the business of opining, but use different media. Both have been caught making assertions they claim are factual but are not. If you really think that Limbaugh doesn’t lie then you are helplessly stupid.

[Rebel Yell]

.... i blame the jews
As you should, Fez Man.....As you should.

[TheDrip]

I wonder how full of flat-out lies and completely out of context statements this sequel will have. He'll have his work cut out for him to top the last one.

Considering he asked a childless Congressman if his children were serving in the military and when the guy answered no (in passing) he used that in his rant about how politicians don't send their children to war.

Fuck fatty.

[Vyce]

I'm sure the sequel will probably be him presenting various 9/11 conspiracy theories, not personally committing to any of them but giving the impression that ultimately the Bush Administration did cause 9/11.

That's my prediction.

[MrBogey]

There is no Cannes award for “exposing the truth” nor is there a requirement to be politically unbiased to sit on the Cannes jury.



Moore makes self-described “cinematic op-eds” – they are both in the business of opining, but use different media. Both have been caught making assertions they claim are factual but are not. If you really think that Limbaugh doesn’t lie then you are helplessly stupid.

So you're saying the Cannes award for documentary film-making isn't really an award for making documentaries?

Limbaugh is paid to opine his thoughts and it made him popular. He's well received bcause of his popularity. Moore is celebrated for what he says. There's a difference.

[mendozathejew]

I'm sure the sequel will probably be him presenting various 9/11 conspiracy theories, not personally committing to any of them but giving the impression that ultimately the Bush Administration did cause 9/11.

That's my prediction.

Im gona go with the decline of the American empire.

or maybe all of the above

[BloodyDiaper]

So you're saying the Cannes award for documentary film-making isn't really an award for making documentaries?

There is no Cannes award for documentary film-making.

Limbaugh is paid to opine his thoughts and it made him popular. He's well received bcause of his popularity. Moore is celebrated for what he says. There's a difference.

Oh, glad you cleared that up...:icon_roll

[BloodyDiaper]

I'm sure the sequel will probably be him presenting various 9/11 conspiracy theories, not personally committing to any of them but giving the impression that ultimately the Bush Administration did cause 9/11.

That's my prediction.

Hopefully he'll stay clear of that B.S. and just do his thing with all of the real stuff that happened like Katrina, using his first veto to stop a stem cell research bill, the torture debate, Terry Shiavo, etc. You know the clip of him trying to give Merkel a shoulder rub will be in there too...

[Vyce]

Outside of the torture debate, how are any of those things tied in with 9/11?

[Fr. Dougal]

Hopefully he'll stay clear of that B.S. and just do his thing with all of the real stuff that happened like Katrina, using his first veto to stop a stem cell research bill, the torture debate, Terry Shiavo, etc. You know the clip of him trying to give Merkel a shoulder rub will be in there too...

Katrina? Bush had nothing to do with that fiasco. That was all on the LA governor.

Terry Shiavo? WTF???

[Ted the Poster]

I saw a license plate on the front of one of my customer's cars that said it all:

"Micheal Moore is a fat ass"

Holy shit, how many letters do they let you use in that state?

[Vyce]

I saw a license plate on the front of one of my customer's cars that said it all:

"Micheal Moore is a fat ass"

Cause that's the name I tag with. Michael Moore of D-Sippers.

[Death Metal Moe]

Michael Moore Making Fahrenheit 911 Sequel

Death Metal Moe planning to miss this one too.

[Begbie]

Katrina? Bush had nothing to do with that fiasco. That was all on the LA governor.

Terry Shiavo? WTF???

Well, it's popular to blame Katrina on Bush...after all, Kanye West said so. Alot of people are uneducated have an inability to fact check and will believe anything you tell them.

The uneducated and misinformed: Seeing that this Hurricane was headed toward a very black population, Bush (and any republican) ignored the threat because he hates black people and had no problem watching them drown.

The educated and informed: Emergency disaster plans and procedures begin at the local and state levels...then continue onto the federal level. The New Orleans mayor, Ray Nagin, did not implement an evacuation plan for the city of New Orleans until 19 hours before landfall. Besides putting blame on Bush, his reasoning for this emergency evacuation delay is unknown. So those parking lots full of school buses flooded out...yep, Nagin's fault. And at the state and local level, shelters were set up for residents...but since there was a delay and no real count of how many people would need shelter, there wasn't enough water or food, lack of security, and sanitary conditions were horrid. So all that mayhem that went on in the Superdome...yep, Governor Blanco and Mayor Nagin's fault. The state and local governments were in charge...and they failed miserably...and ironically, both the mayor and governor were democrats. Could you blame Bush for any of this? Sure, FEMA and the Red Cross were underprepared for the amount of people that were displaced by this disaster. But to throw just him under the bus for this colossal failure of the three different levels of government is ridiculous.

The uneducated, self-important, truthers: Bush and a secret team of scientists and meteorologists devised a way to control the weather, and they created this hurricane to steer right into New Orleans in order to kill black people and take some attention off of the Iraq War.

And we all know that Bush was the one who caused Terri Schiavo's cardiac arrest and he himself (along with the support from Michael Schiavo), ordered that she be executed. Come on FD! Get with the times, maaaaaaaaaan!!

[BloodyDiaper]

Katrina? Bush had nothing to do with that fiasco. That was all on the LA governor.

Terry Shiavo? WTF???

Sure, it was all the LA Governor's fault:

Hurricane Katrina exposed the U.S. government's failure to learn the lessons of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, as leaders from President Bush down disregarded ample warnings of the threat to New Orleans and did not execute emergency plans or share information that would have saved lives, according to a blistering report by House investigators.

...

The 600-plus-page report lays primary fault with the passive reaction and misjudgments of top Bush aides, singling out Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, the Homeland Security Operations Center and the White House Homeland Security Council, according to a 60-page summary of the document obtained by The Washington Post. Regarding Bush, the report found that "earlier presidential involvement could have speeded the response" because he alone could have cut through all bureaucratic resistance.

The report, produced by an 11-member House select committee of Republicans chaired by Rep. Thomas M. Davis III (R-Va.), proposes few specific changes. But it is an unusual compendium of criticism by the House GOP, which generally has not been aggressive in its oversight of the administration.

The report portrays Chertoff, who took the helm of the department six months before the storm, as detached from events. It contends he switched on the government's emergency response systems "late, ineffectively or not at all," delaying the flow of federal troops and materiel by as much as three days.

The White House did not fully engage the president or "substantiate, analyze and act on the information at its disposal," failing to confirm the collapse of New Orleans's levee system on Aug. 29, the day of Katrina's landfall, which led to catastrophic flooding of the city of 500,000 people

...

White House spokesman Trent Duffy said Bush had full confidence in his homeland security team, both appointed and career. "The president was involved from beginning to end," implementing emergency powers before the storm and taking responsibility afterward, Duffy said.

Duffy objected to a leaked draft of an unpublished report, and said the White House is completing its own study. "The president is less interested in yesterday, and more interested with today and tomorrow," he said, "so that we can be better prepared for next time."

The report puts the government response in a larger context and offers a few new details. In months of hearings, House and Senate investigative committees have already revealed the lack of White House awareness of events on the ground, political infighting between federal and state leaders, delays in ordering evacuations and the meltdown of FEMA operations.

...

The report reconstructs a chronology of events over a three-week span from Aug. 22 to Sept. 12. It focuses primarily on failures by Chertoff and the rest of the administration to execute a year-old National Response Plan and set up a related command structure, designed to marshal resources in the critical first 72 hours after a catastrophe.

The report said the single biggest federal failure was not anticipating the consequences of the storm. Disaster planners had rated the flooding of New Orleans as the nation's most feared scenario, testing it under a catastrophic disaster preparedness program in 2004.

About 56 hours before Katrina made landfall, the National Weather Service and National Hurricane Center cited an "extremely high probability" that New Orleans would be flooded and tens of thousands of residents killed.

Given those warnings, the report notes Bush's televised statement on Sept. 1 that "I don't think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees," and concludes: "Comments such as those . . . do not appear to be consistent with the advice and counsel one would expect to have been provided by a senior disaster professional."

As the president's principal disaster adviser, Chertoff poorly executed many decisions, including declaring Katrina an "incident of national significance" -- the highest designation under the national emergency response plan and convening an interagency board of experienced strategic advisers on Aug. 30 instead of Aug. 27; designating an untrained Brown to take charge of the disaster; and failing to invoke a federal plan that would have pushed federal help to overwhelmed state and local officials rather than waiting for them to request it.
...


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/11/AR2006021101409_pf.html

As for Schiavo:

For days, President Bush kept his public distance from the Terri Schiavo case and let his spokesman deliver mild statements suggesting that the president did not want Ms. Schiavo, who has severe brain damage, to die. But on Saturday night, when Mr. Bush made the rare decision to interrupt his Texas vacation and rush back to Washington to be in place to sign a bill that could restore Ms. Schiavo's feeding tube, the White House said that the issue had become one of "defending life," and that time was of the essence.

So, too, were White House politics, Republicans and conservative religious figures said. Although Mr. Bush was described as personally moved by the issue, his dramatic return was seen as a powerful embrace of the "culture of life" issues of religious conservatives who helped him win the White House in 2004. Those groups will be crucial to the political fortunes of the Republican Party in 2006 and 2008.

...

White House officials insisted that politics played no part in the president's decision, even though Republican senators were provided with talking points, apparently by Republican aides, that characterized the Schiavo case as "a great political issue" that resonates with Christian conservatives. Scott McClellan, the White House press secretary, said that Mr. Bush's only motivation was to act with speed and to give Ms. Schiavo's parents, who are battling Ms. Schiavo's husband to have the feeding tube restored, another chance to save their daughter. The bill would allow the parents to take the issue to federal court for a hearing.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/21/politics/21bush.html?ei=5090&en=3a4fe8cbe9cf4d59&ex=1269061200&partner=rssuserland&pagewanted=print&position=

[Vyce]

Federal response should have never even been as vital as it was, had the criminally negligent local government - from the governor on down to Mayor Nagin - did their jobs.

You basically want to impose 100% blame on the Bush administration for a situation which was irrevocably and utterly fucked up by the local (Democrat) government of LA long before the feds ever touched it.

Ah well. The LA Dems are getting theirs in the end. Ass handed to them by Jindal (who'll be the right's Barry O in a few years, only this time with actual experience and governing ability).

But that's all a separate issue. Katrina still has fuck-all to do with 9/11, unless you just expect (or want) this movie to be Michael Moore's parade of partisan propaganda against all things Republican.

[MrBogey]

Being intimately familiar with what happened here with Katrina;

Bush got a bum wrap. His problem laid in with the recovery though politicization will damn him for everything. And I certainly don't trust the Post's spin on things. The governor here fumbled it all and was afraid Bush would show her up if he was allowed to take total control after the hurricane so they tried to hold onto authority and it gummed up everything.

[BloodyDiaper]

Federal response should have never even been as vital as it was, had the criminally negligent local government - from the governor on down to Mayor Nagin - did their jobs.

You basically want to impose 100% blame on the Bush administration for a situation which was irrevocably and utterly fucked up by the local (Democrat) government of LA long before the feds ever touched it.


I didn’t write anything about imposing 100% of the blame on the Bush Administration. What I don’t think is arguable is that Bush bears responsibility for the response by the federal government. It is inarguable because Bush himself accepted responsibility:

Bush takes blame for Katrina flaws
President heading to Louisiana on Thursday for primetime speech
The Associated Press
updated 1:44 p.m. ET, Tues., Sept. 13, 2005
WASHINGTON - President Bush said Tuesday that "I take responsibility" for failures in dealing with Hurricane Katrina and that the disaster raised broader questions about the government's ability to respond to natural disasters as well as terror attacks.
"Katrina exposed serious problems in our response capability at all levels of government," Bush said at joint White House news conference with the president of Iraq.
"To the extent the federal government didn't fully do its job right, I take responsibility," Bush said.
…
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9324891/

What is arguable is to what extent should the federal government intervene when it has warning that a potentially catastrophic natural disaster is about to occur? Should the same procedures that grant state and local government primary responsibility when a “normal” disaster or emergency occurs apply when the disaster or emergency is much larger than normal or should the President be prepared to proactively take control of the situation and react quickly to contingencies? Some here seem to think that the size of the disaster doesn’t require any adaptation of the normal procedures which would include a more “vital” role for the federal government. I don’t agree and neither did the GOP-dominated House select committee I quoted above. Neither, apparently, does John McCain:

McCain, in Lower Ninth Ward, Blasts Bush Katrina Response
By Juliet Eilperin
NEW ORLEANS --Touring the Lower Ninth Ward this morning, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) blasted the Bush administration's handling of Hurricane Katrina and vowed to respond differently if elected president.

"Never again, never again will a disaster of this nature be handled in the terrible and disgraceful way that it was handled," McCain told reporters after walking a few blocks through the still-devastated area.

McCain, flanked by his wife Cindy, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R), local pastors, community activists and a coterie of National Guardsmen, spent 20 minutes touring houses that were in several different stages of rehabilitation. While some, such as the home of music legend Fats Domino, had been refurbished, others remained dilapidated and abandoned.

In one of his clearest breaks with the current administration, McCain said he would handle natural disasters differently by putting qualified people in charge of the nation's emergency response team and enlisting the aid of private businesses. In an interview with reporters before his walking tour, McCain said he was confident voters would be able to able to distinguish between him and President Bush, saying, "People will judge me by my own actions, my own vision and my own record." When asked to describe, during his press conference, how the administration had failed to respond to Katrina, he replied, "I think everybody is aware of how it was a failure."
…
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/04/24/mccain_tours_lower_ninth_ward.html?nav=rss_email/components



But that's all a separate issue. Katrina still has fuck-all to do with 9/11, unless you just expect (or want) this movie to be Michael Moore's parade of partisan propaganda against all things Republican.


I wouldn’t have a problem with that. Like I said – talk radio shitheads do it day after day (in some cases for decades) so if Moore wants to return fire in a two hour movie every couple years then good for him. There’s not much else left for him to cover on 9-11 itself so it wouldn’t surprise me if the sequel continues where the original left off in Iraq (before the insurgency and sectarian violence really peaked, and before the Duelfer WMD report) and takes up other examples of recklessness, incompetence, and buffoonery of this failed presidency. Katrina is an obvious one and the painfully slow and inadequate response there contrasted against the outrageous coordination of federal intervention in the Schiavo matter is just the type of thing that would be appropriate to document for history.

[MrBogey]

What are you talking about? The Federal gov't was mostly on the ball with Mississippi and Texas. The locals refused to cooperate with the feds because of showmanship and the whole rescue/recovery got fucked up because of it. Politics entere it and Bush apologized for a lot of things he didn't have to because it wasn't worth arguing about.

Which is why if ever I'm prez and the governor of a state says that they don't need my help I'll post it far and wide and not take that crap.