Ray Bradbury vs. Michael Moore

[Otto]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Doug Millison" <dougmillison at comcast.net>
Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2004 8:41 PM
Subject: Re: Ray Bradbury vs. Michael Moore

> I suspect he's doing it for political reasons.  It's been a long time
> since I read Bradbury or much about him, but I seem to remember that
> his politics drift towards the Far Right.  Please correct me if I'm
> wrong.
> -Doug
>
>
> On Jun 22, 2004, at 11:37 AM, monroe at mpm.edu wrote:
>
> > Ray Bradbury, screw him. One, you can't copyright a title (though
> > Harlan
> > Ellison litigated himself into doing so for all intents and purposes a
> > while
> > back anyway, so ...). Two, such wordplay is also legally protected
> > anyway
> > (as "satire" and so forth). And, three, so far as I know, Bradbury
> > hisself
> > never bothered to clear "I Sing the Body Electric!" with the Walt
> > Whitman
> > estate, so ... so, again, screw Ray Bradbury. And Mel Gibson. Vive le
> > Francois Truffaut ...
> >
> >
>

"Michael Moore ist ein fürchterlicher Mensch"
http://www.spiegel.de/kultur/kino/0,1518,302434,00.html

"Michael Moore ist ein Drecksack"
http://www.faz.net/s/RubF7538E273FAA4006925CC36BB8AFE338/Doc~EE1EF80CD7B564BE1B88F27D5B62B1CC2~ATpl~Ecommon~Scontent.html
(sorry for the long url)

Ray Bradbury rips Michael Moore
'Fahrenheit 451' author says filmmaker stole his title for Bush-bash
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38776

Ray Bradbury: "Michael Moore is an asshole"
http://blogs.salon.com/0001561/2004/06/02.html

Michael Moore around the clock bash
(lot of Moore-bash links including "the hitchhiker's guide to Michael
Moore's lies, distortions, hate and fabrications")
http://blogs.salon.com/0001561/2004/06/04.html#a5410

I agree that titles can't be copyrighted.

Given the topic of "Fahrenheit 451" and Moore's opinion that President Bush
is trying to turn the USA into some similar kind of superstate as depicted
in the novel the title "Fahrenheit 9/11" is intelligent and witty, no
difference if you agree or disagree to Moore's thesises.

On the Moore-bashing website they have reasonable doubts if Moore's films
really can be called documentaries in the strict sense of the word, and I
must say that I partly share these doubts, but as the title "Fahrenheit
9/11" already says, this is something between fact and fiction. And this, on
another level, fits perfectly well to what Bush & Blair have told the world
about the Iraquian threat. Mainly, and I cannot put it any better as the
Moore-critics say: "lies, distortions, hate and fabrications."

It is no lie that I've personally seen a soldier from the 101. Airborne
Divison telling an embedded journalist from CNN shortly before the initial
ground attack that now they're going to take revenge for 9/11.

"The administration was perfectly happy when more than four out of five
Americans polled, as we went to war, said that they believed Saddam Hussein
had something to do with the destruction of the World Trade Center towers."
http://www.alternet.org/story/19011/

The title already tells what the film is about, fiction presented to us as
facts, for a certain purpose: to influence public opinion and to get other
people to die for you voluntarily:

        "The basic problem," he proposes, "has always been
        getting other people to die for you. What's worth enough
        for a man to give up his life? (GR 701)

I'm not even sure if I agree myself totally to Moore but to describe best
what I personally think about Moore's critique of Bush there's a German
saying: Auf einen groben Klotz gehört ein grober Keil! And that's what
Moore is.

After all maybe Umberto's Lumberjack-impression wasn't the worst idea
-- in a not-so literal sense.*

Otto

* I'm sorry that Umberto has been unable
   to appreciate the fine irony in MalignD's
   response.