• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

No Oscar for Farenheit 9/11

Questioninggeller

Illuminator
Q
Joined
May 11, 2002
Messages
3,048
But can it also be shown on TV? I brought this possibility up in this week's Rolling Stone interview. Our contract with our DVD distributor says no, it cannot. I have asked them to show it just once, perhaps the night before the election. So far, no deal. But I haven't given up trying.

The only problem with my desire to get this movie in front of as many Americans as possible is that, should it air on TV, I will NOT be eligible to submit "Fahrenheit 9/11" for Academy Award consideration for Best Documentary. Academy rules forbid the airing of a documentary on television within nine months of its theatrical release (fiction films do not have the same restriction).

Although I have no assurance from our home video distributor that they would allow a one-time television broadcast -- and the chances are they probably won't -- I have decided it is more important to take that risk and hope against hope that I can persuade someone to put it on TV, even if it's the night before the election.

Therefore, I have decided not to submit "Fahrenheit 9/11" for consideration for the Best Documentary Oscar. If there is even the remotest of chances that I can get this film seen by a few million more Americans before election day, then that is more important to me than winning another documentary Oscar. I have already won a Best Documentary statue. Having a second one would be nice, but not as nice as getting this country back in the hands of the majority.

The deadline to submit the film for the documentary Oscar was last Wednesday. I told my crew who worked on the film, let's let someone else have that Oscar. We have already helped to ignite the biggest year ever for nonfiction films. Last week, 1 out of every 5 films playing in movie theaters across America was a documentary! That is simply unheard of. There have been so many great nonfiction films this year, why not step aside and share what we have with someone else? Remove the 800-pound gorilla from that Oscar category and let the five films who get nominated have all the attention they deserve (instead of the focus being on a film that has already had more than its share of attention).

I've read a lot about "Fahrenheit" being a "sure bet" for the documentary Oscar this year. I don't believe anything is truly a "sure bet." And, in the end, I think sometimes it's good for your soul to give up something everyone says is so easily yours (ask Olympic swimmer Michael Phelps why he gave up his spot in the last race to someone else equally deserving, and you'll know what I am talking about).

I have informed our distributors of my decision. They support me (in fact, they then offered to submit our film for all the other categories it is eligible for, including Best Picture -- so, hey, who knows, maybe I'll get to complete that Oscar speech from 2003! Sorry, just kidding).

Don't get your hopes up for seeing "Fahrenheit 9/11" on TV before the election. In fact, I would count on NOT seeing it there (you know me, I'm always going after something I probably shouldn't). Get to the theaters soon, if you haven't already, or get it from the video store in October and hold house parties. Share it with everyone you know, especially your nonvoting friends. I have included 100 minutes of extras on the DVD -- powerful footage obtained after we made the movie, and some things that are going to drive Karl Rove into a permanent tailspin -- more on this later!

Thanks for all of your support. And go see "Super Size Me," "Control Room," "The Corporation," "Orwell Rolls Over in His Grave," "Bush's Brain," Robert Greenwald's films and the upcoming "Yes Men." You won't be sorry!
Click to expand...

Full piece: http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?messageDate=2004-09-06
 
whoa whoa whoa,

some one put something on the board and didn't voice their opinion on it. :( i am getting scared.

Personally I wasn't a fan of the movie, from a "movie" prospective. I thought it was rather shodily put together. "Bowling for Columbine" was much more entertaining.

Since this is the political board, I will say something on politics. I don't believe it will make any difference on the night before election, especially with such a stigma as the "Moore" name on it. People already have their opinons made up by that time. About Bush and about Moore.

I do believe he is a little pompus with the "Remove the 800-pound gorilla from that Oscar category and let the five films who get nominated have all the attention they deserve." I mean, even I wouldn't say he weighes 800 pounds.:D

(I slay me)
 
Moore's ego is obviously out of control.

And no network will touch his "documentary" the night before the election in such an obvious attempt to influence the election. Of course, Moore would see it as censorship, oppression, quack, quack, quack.

How funny would it be if his show doesn't get nominated for an Oscar?
 
Luke T. said:
Moore's ego is obviously out of control.

And no network will touch his "documentary" the night before the election in such an obvious attempt to influence the election. Of course, Moore would see it as censorship, oppression, quack, quack, quack.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Maybe not the broadcast channels but MTV would run it. BRAVO would run it. Discovery might run it, as might A&E. BET would certainly run it.

Their (Kerry crowd) best bet is MTV because the viewership is generally quite young and impressionable. Running it on BRAVO might be a waste because of their demographics. Same for BET.

It's a good idea for the Kerry camp.
 
corplinx said:
McCain-Feingold is rolling its in grave.
Click to expand...

Inasmuch as it was born-dead but propped up by bipartisan stilts, I agree. What a stupid, stupid bandaid that was. I wonder what bandaid they'll stick over-top of that one.
 
Yes, he's such a brave soul, Mr. Moore. We applaud his sacrifice of not submitting a film to the Oscar nominations. Next he'll want applause because he decided to forgo caviar for a week in sympathy with the Iraqis, who get no caviar at all lately, due to evil USA, unlike the paradise of caviar they had under Hussein.

Does Moore ever do anything without expecting applause for how wonderful it is?
 
Yeah, that (giving up chance at being nominated voluntarily ) seemed obvious to me too. Yet I don't think it's that big of a sacrifice because I believe he's so sincere in his effort to do anything to affect the election that whatever happens in next year's Oscars is completely uminportant to him.

Yet I think Rush Limbaugh is sincere too and I have trouble picturing him sacrificing a week of caviar, or his regular habit of narcotics, or whatever it is he does to have Acquired his Immune Defficiency Situation which left the broadcaster deaf. Of course he's not as popular with the American public and probably couldn't afford caviar along with his other "habits".... but at least he can tell us about morality. So, there's that.
 
Luke T. said:

How funny would it be if his show doesn't get nominated for an Oscar?
Click to expand...

If it goes on TV, it will be up for an 'Emmy'.
 
Rob Lister said:
Their (Kerry crowd) best bet is MTV because the viewership is generally quite young and impressionable. Running it on BRAVO might be a waste because of their demographics. Same for BET.

It's a good idea for the Kerry camp.
Click to expand...

The MTV crowd might be their best viewing audience, but as for actually influencing the election??? Remember, this is a demographic that has an unproportionately low voter turnout. When they actually run the film (if they do) these people must already be registered.
 
i've posted this idea before.

I wonder if Moore isn't a net postive for the Bush campaign.

Moore seems to be willing to stretch the truth if he thinks it can help him sell his point or his film. The problem is that people who might be swayed by him have also pidgeon holed him as something of a liar. So a great many people are going to identify Moore as a sort of dishonest kook and tend to identify his positions with dishonest kookery and as a result msy tend to believe them less than they otherwise might of ig Moore hadn't existed.

Note that I have no doubt that Moore is successful at revving up the rank and file anti-Bushers but they weren't going to vote for Bush anyway. My question goes to his effect on the undecided middle.
 
My question is if he did show it, would it fall under the Campaign Finance Reform Act?
 
I'll watch it when it eventually comes on t.v. for free.

This is all about money. DVD sales are worth more than an Oscar. Maybe the next documentary should be about the free downloading of "Fahrenheit 911" because anyone who wants to see it can see it for free.

Michael Moore is perhaps a bit more heavyset and a bit less well-groomed than an adult male should be, but that's his business.

He could have submitted it for consideration, and the Academy could have disqualified him if his DVD company allowed a TV broadcast.

I sense a lie here. Mr. Moore produces the t.v. broadcast, takes a cut of the profits, and that boosts his dvd sales. Does Moore own a stake in the DVD distribution company?

I sense a big fat effer who hasn't seen his genitals in many years telling lies. Of course, I could be wrong.
 
TeaBag420 said:
I'll watch it when it eventually comes on t.v. for free.

This is all about money. DVD sales are worth more than an Oscar. Maybe the next documentary should be about the free downloading of "Fahrenheit 911" because anyone who wants to see it can see it for free.

Michael Moore is perhaps a bit more heavyset and a bit less well-groomed than an adult male should be, but that's his business.

He could have submitted it for consideration, and the Academy could have disqualified him if his DVD company allowed a TV broadcast.

I sense a lie here. Mr. Moore produces the t.v. broadcast, takes a cut of the profits, and that boosts his dvd sales. Does Moore own a stake in the DVD distribution company?

I sense a big fat effer who hasn't seen his genitals in many years telling lies. Of course, I could be wrong.
Click to expand...
I think you would be approximately the only person on this board who thinks Moore does things due to financial motivation.

Your sig suggests you may be an Idiot...is this true?
 
davefoc said:
i've posted this idea before.

I wonder if Moore isn't a net postive for the Bush campaign.

Moore seems to be willing to stretch the truth if he thinks it can help him sell his point or his film. The problem is that people who might be swayed by him have also pidgeon holed him as something of a liar. So a great many people are going to identify Moore as a sort of dishonest kook and tend to identify his positions with dishonest kookery and as a result msy tend to believe them less than they otherwise might of ig Moore hadn't existed.

Note that I have no doubt that Moore is successful at revving up the rank and file anti-Bushers but they weren't going to vote for Bush anyway. My question goes to his effect on the undecided middle.
Click to expand...

I don't know how much effect he'll have on the undecided, but it could do a lot of good getting people that otherwise wouldn't vote at all to show up to the polls.

I do take issue with any distortions of the truth in the film that may be there... there is plenty to discredit the president with, without resorting to distortions you can be caught on. Don't make the same mistake the police did with OJ...
 
By the way, MAD magazine just printed a "Celebrity death odds list" about Moore. Included among others are "Killed in Iraq after being drafted by special presidential order", "Disintegrated from psychic hate of millions of conservatives wishing him dead", "Heart attack from shock after hearing his movies actually changed somebody's mind", and "Sexually transmitted disease" (Odds: 12 trillion to 1).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom