An American Carol

[Clothahump]

The last couple of weeks have not been fun. Ike destroyed my Taekwondo school, Work has been annoying beyond belief and I'm having physical issues. I've been stressed worse than I ever thought possible.

Then I went to see this movie. Laughter is truly the best medicine. I have not laughed so hard in a long time.

Go see this one, folks. It is absolutely hilarious.

[Cisco]

I wish it was not explicitly Michael Moore. Even though I don't have much love for him I just think it would be a better movie if the main character was more generic. Being Moore I'm afraid it's going to be all preachy/messagey.

[RikWriter]

I'm going to see it next weekend. Might buy tickets for some friends to go too.

[Frostillicus]

Many, many others would beg to differ.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/10/4/182322/458/169/620211

[RikWriter]

Many, many others would beg to differ.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/10/4/182322/458/169/620211

ROFL! The Daily Kos? You might as well quote Soviet-era Pravda! Actually, Pravda might have more credibility...

[MsRobyn]

I saw it today, too.

Like Cisco, I think the movie would have been better if it were about some more generic liberal and not specifically Michael Moore. I did enjoy the skewering of the more wiggy factions of the Left; they need to be made fun of and their antics and single-issue politics make it easy to do.

I also think it's funny that this is the most legit part for Paris Hilton and Gary Coleman.

Robin

[NDP]

Many, many others would beg to differ.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1...458/169/620211

ROFL! The Daily Kos? You might as well quote Soviet-era Pravda! Actually, Pravda might have more credibility...

If you had RTFA in the Daily Kos link, you would've seen that it mentions that even the New York Post--that bastion of Murdochian right-wing sensibilities--ripped this movie a new one. If a right-wing comedy can't even get the New York Post to say something positive about it, I would say it's utterly failed in its main objective.

[RikWriter]

If you had RTFA in the Daily Kos link

Then I would have added to the daily take of the daily fuckhead who runs the daily Kos. And I don't intend to do that.

[Baldwin]

I guess it's kind of a compliment to have somebody make a whole movie to satirize you. Does it make fun of Michael Moore's actual faults (bombast, stupid stunts, not being a scrupulous with the facts as he should be), or does it make up something stupid?

[RikWriter]

I guess it's kind of a compliment to have somebody make a whole movie to satirize you.

So W is Oliver Stone's compliment to President Bush?

[gaffa]

Looking at Rotten Tomatoes (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/an_american_carol/), even the positive reviews are not glowing. To quote from one "positive" review (http://www.7mpictures.com/inside/reviews/anamericancarol_review.htm):

Still, the movie has a message, and that message gets in the way of the comedy at least half of the time.

I'm a lefty who enjoys some conservative humorists like P.J. O'Rorke (although he seems to have abandoned the Republican party for the Libertarians). The Right deserves it's own comedy. But this one does not look like it's going to draw in anyone who doesn't agree with the filmmaker's agenda, and get chuckles from anyone who doesn't believe Michael Moore hates America.

If this is what the right-wing needs to salve the pain of the election, slap it on.

[Steve MB]

From the (highly conservative) New York Post review:

1/2 * (on a scale of 4)

A Michael Moore-like film maker shares a portable toilet with JFK, Gen. George Patton and Bill O'Reilly (as himself) in "An American Carol," which surely has two of them - not to mention Charles Dickens - rolling in their graves.

Even if it weren't three years too late to parody Moore (ineptly played by Kevin Farley), Moore's ridiculous tribute to Cuban health care in "Sicko" is far funnier than anything in this desperately laughless farce from David Zucker...

Also embarrassing themselves in "An American Carol" are Leslie Nielsen, Dennis Hopper, James Woods and Paris Hilton - the latter as herself, struggling to deliver a joke involving Nazi filmmaker Leni Riefenstahl....

[gaffa]

Someone on the Daily Kos site very fairly compares it to that other right-wing film "Team America: World Police" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0372588/). I laughed my ass off at that one, even as people I admire were being ripped (MATT DAMON!).

[RikWriter]

From the (highly conservative) New York Post review:

Still going to go see it and pay for my friends to see it.

[Camus]

From some of the reviews which mention a ghost of America past visit to "still-smoldering" remains of the WTC, it sounds like the main character shouldn't have been a Michael Moore stand-in, but the Colorado professor who described the people that died on 9/11 as "little Eichmanns."

There are people out there who really do believe what that parody of Michael Moore believes and I don't know why the filmmakers don't just use them. Other than their desire to make a lot of fat jokes.

[Cervaise]

Never mind.

[Lamar Mundane]

Note to conservatives: Although many like his films, most liberals think Michael Moore is an ass just like you do. He is not and never has been a liberal icon.

[Charogne]

Note to conservatives: Although many like his films, most liberals think Michael Moore is an ass just like you do. He is not and never has been a liberal icon.

I have to admit I'm curious why this is... He's fast and loose at times with details, seems to be the prognosis, but more so than Limbaugh/O'Reilly/Coulter/Savage and their ilk? Perhaps his most controversial statements have to do with Saudi Arabia and its links to the 9/11 attacks. Does this explain why he seems to be most unpopular in the oil states?

[RikWriter]

I have to admit I'm curious why this is... He's fast and loose at times with details, seems to be the prognosis, but more so than Limbaugh/O'Reilly/Coulter/Savage and their ilk? Perhaps his most controversial statements have to do with Saudi Arabia and its links to the 9/11 attacks. Does this explain why he seems to be most unpopular in the oil states?

Yes, he is far more fast and loose with the facts than a typical conservative pundit such as Limbaugh or Hannity. He MIGHT be comparable to Savage, who is usually melodramatic, full of himself and full of shit, but the difference is that Savage never made a series of movies he tried to pass off as documentaries. Coulter I tend not to pay much attention to, but she strikes me as what Michael Moore would be if he were a skinny woman with less talent for self-promotion.

[Lamar Mundane]

I have to admit I'm curious why this is... He's fast and loose at times with details, seems to be the prognosis, but more so than Limbaugh/O'Reilly/Coulter/Savage and their ilk? Perhaps his most controversial statements have to do with Saudi Arabia and its links to the 9/11 attacks. Does this explain why he seems to be most unpopular in the oil states?

See the stunt he tried to pull at the Academy Awards when he won for 9/11. He is a full of himself blowhard, and liberals as a rule don't like those kinds.

[RikWriter]

See the stunt he tried to pull at the Academy Awards when he won for 9/11. He is a full of himself blowhard, and liberals as a rule don't like those kinds.

Then why's Olbermann so popular with liberals?

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Yes, he is far more fast and loose with the facts than a typical conservative pundit such as Limbaugh or Hannity.
This is utterly false.

[RikWriter]

This is utterly false.

No, it's utterly true.

[Charogne]

Hm. Rik says true, Dio says false.

In the meantime, a group of (mostly) Saudis, led by Osama Bin Ladin (a Saudi) and primarily funded by Saudis, hijacked American planes and flew them into the Twin Towers, killing our fellow Americans (albeit New Yorkers. Dub in Pace commercial -- "Get a rope!").
Our response as a nation is as follows: evacuate as many Saudi bigwigs and members of the Bin Ladin family as we can as soon as the "no-fly" period ends, invade a neighboring country that the Saudis are on bad terms with, exempt the Saudis from strictures on human trafficking, remove any references to the Kingdom from the official 9/11 report, and sell them arms.
I can understand why/how Texans would be alright with this course of action, and angry with Moore for snitching it out... but how about patriotic Americans?

[RikWriter]

Hm. Rik says true, Dio says false.

In the meantime, a group of (mostly) Saudis, led by Osama Bin Ladin (a Saudi) and primarily funded by Saudis, hijacked American planes and flew them into the Twin Towers, killing our fellow Americans (albeit New Yorkers. Dub in Pace commercial -- "Get a rope!").
Our response as a nation is as follows: evacuate as many Saudi bigwigs and members of the Bin Ladin family as we can as soon as the "no-fly" period ends, invade a neighboring country that the Saudis are on bad terms with, exempt the Saudis from strictures on human trafficking, remove any references to the Kingdom from the official 9/11 report, and sell them arms.
I can understand why/how Texans would be alright with this course of action, and angry with Moore for snitching it out... but how about patriotic Americans?

You're as deceptive as he is, congratulations.
Here's a question for you: In the 1880s a group of mercenaries led by AMERICAN William Walker tried to take over Nicaragua. Should Nicaragua have blamed the US government for this and declared war on us? I mean, Walker and many of his followers were from the US. By your "logic," they should have declared war on us and treated us like we wanted them all dead...

[Charogne]

[QUOTE=RikWriter;10279357]You're as deceptive as he is, congratulations.

Setting aside your irrelevant question, I wish you'd show me where I've been deceptive. It's possible I could be mistaken in what I've stated -- would you care to point out where and how? All I'm getting now is that you don't like Moore or me.

[RikWriter]

Setting aside your irrelevant question

The question is very relevant, particularly in that you can't answer it without contradicting yourself.

[Charogne]

The question is very relevant, particularly in that you can't answer it without contradicting yourself.

No. I'll have to ask you to excuse me if you think that regrettable actions by individual American citizens in the post Civil War era present any sort of precedent for national security now. You'll just have to pardon my hypocrisy. Nicaragua is no doubt the better for Walker's execution. Would that we could say similar for Bin Ladin.

Back to the specific claims I've made. Did I misstate a pattern of favoritism toward the country most closely associated with support for the 9/11 hijackers? If so, where? And do you think this constructive for our national security? If so, why?

[Frostillicus]

ROFL! The Daily Kos? You might as well quote Soviet-era Pravda! Actually, Pravda might have more credibility...

Next time, actually click on the link BEFORE making a fool of yourself. The link is to several OUTSIDE reviews of the movie, including the aforementioned one from Rupert Murdoch's NY Post. But don't let pesky facts get in the way of your preconceived notions.

[RikWriter]

No. I'll have to ask you to excuse me if you think that regrettable actions by individual American citizens in the post Civil War era present any sort of precedent for national security now.

No, I won't excuse you for refusing to address the question of how the case of the 9-11 hijackers is different than William Walker. Using your logic of corporate responsibility, Nicaragua should have declared war on the US for Walker's actions. If you deny this, you contradict your simplistic and naive position. Which wouldn't be a bad thing, really...it wasn't a very smart position to begin with.

[RikWriter]

Next time, actually click on the link BEFORE making a fool of yourself. .

I would never click on any link to that kook website. For one thing, I don't want to contribute to the lowlife owner. Then I WOULD be a fool.

[Charogne]

Nor will I excuse your your (momentary?) stupidity in pretending it relevant. Nice attempt at a clinch though.

Would you care to engage any of the questions you've avoided so far, or do you just want to hide?

[Trathena]

No, I won't excuse you for refusing to address the question of how the case of the 9-11 hijackers is different than William Walker.

Jesus Christ. You're a mid-90s throwback. Strawman arguments are still being used on message boards? People still fall for them?

[Sampiro]

In the 1880s a group of mercenaries led by AMERICAN William Walker tried to take over Nicaragua.

Well, they should have seen it coming since the exact same thing (takeover of Nicaragua by an American named William Walker) had happened in the 1850s as well. He was backed by Cornelius Vanderbilt among others; they wanted to build a canal across Nicaragua to capitalize first on the California Gold Rush and then to other ships crossing from Atlantic to Pacific.
Walker's regime was recognized by one country as the legitimate gov't of Nicaragua, that being the U.S.A., this due largely to pressure on the Pierce Administration by Congressman in the pay of Vanderbilt. The U.S. definitely had some culpability. (They later they rescinded their recognition when Walker fell from grace with Vanderbilt and the Commodore about-face contributed to the rebels seeking to remove him.)

[DoctorJ]

I've tried to be fair to the commercial and the trailer and ask myself--if this movie weren't rooted in politics almost directly opposite my own, would I find it funny? The answer is a definite "no". It appears to be on a par with the various (X) Movie movies, which I believe Zucker has also had a hand in and for which the trailers always strike me as mind-bogglingly not funny.

It's probably good that conservatives have something to laugh about these days, though. They've got tough times ahead. If a few "Michael Moore hates America, and he's FAT!!!" jokes give them some comfort on election night, more power to them.

[Diogenes the Cynic]

I think it's possble to skewer liberals and be funny. Parker and Stone can do it. This movie doesn't. Satire has to be rooted in something truthful. The strawman caricature of Michael Moore as a guy who hates America and guns is not truthful. There are ways in which he could be parodied in a truthful way, but painting him as anti-American and screaming "Guns are not the answer" while banging the butt of a rifle against the floor (after which the gun goes, off. Ho ho ho), is not parodying anything real. It's like doing a parody of GWB in which he wears a klan hood. It's not wit or insight, just comforting demonization.

[Cervaise]

I'll have to ask you to excuse me if you think that regrettable actions by individual American citizens in the post Civil War era present any sort of precedent for national security now.Yeah, well, one time, there was this stegosaurus who was a real asshole...

[RikWriter]

Nor will I excuse your your (momentary?) stupidity in pretending it relevant. Nice attempt at a clinch though.

Would you care to engage any of the questions you've avoided so far, or do you just want to hide?

I won't be answering any of your questions until you answer my very relevant one.

[RikWriter]

Jesus Christ. You're a mid-90s throwback. Strawman arguments are still being used on message boards? People still fall for them?

How is it a straw man? The two incidents have people from one nation attacking another without the permission or sanction of their home country. He thinks we should have blamed and attacked Saiudi because some of the hijackers were Saudi. I am asking whether Nicaragua should have attacked us because Walker was American. I understand that he and you don't like the quesiton because it would make you contradict yourself, but that's your problem, not mine.

[RikWriter]

Yeah, well, one time, there was this stegosaurus who was a real asshole...

Did he post in this thread?

[Trathena]

How is it a straw man? . . . He thinks we should have blamed and attacked Saiudi because some of the hijackers were Saudi.

He never said we should attack Saudi. He pointed out that it was Moore (among others) who told America about Saudi Arabia's involvement with 9/11 and our administration's coddling of them. You took him completely out of context by removing his comments about Moore, and then misrepresented what he said. That is a classic straw man tactic.

At the same time, incredibly, you've managed to also employ a red herring argument about some guy's actions in Nicaragua over a century ago. Thus:

Jesus Christ. You're a mid-90s throwback. Red Herring arguments are still being used on message boards? People still fall for them?

[RikWriter]

He never said we should attack Saudi. He pointed out that it was Moore (among others) who told America about Saudi Arabia's involvement with 9/11 and our administration's coddling of them. You took him completely out of context by removing his comments about Moore, and then misrepresented what he said. That is a classic straw man tactic.

At the same time, incredibly, you've managed to also employ a red herring argument about some guy's actions in Nicaragua over a century ago. Thus:

Jesus Christ. You're a mid-90s throwback. Red Herring arguments are still being used on message boards? People still fall for them?

I reject your ridiculous notion that the argument is in any way a red herring.
First of all, if the Saudi government was NOT responsible for the hijackings, why SHOULDN'T we be friendly with them? At the time, it was not an unreasonable assumption that we were going to need their help to find the network behind the attacks.
Second, there is NOTHING irrelevant about an historical precedent for the situation. The fact that you find historical precedent irrelevant says more about your brand of reasoning than anything else.

[Vihaga]

No plans to see it. I heard a radio ad for it describing it as a comedy promoting family values, or something like that (I don't remember the exact words), so I have no interest. Pretty much the last thing I want to go see is a comedy with a conservative agenda.

[Spiny Norman]

The movie caught my attention after reading an interview with David Zucker complaining that "Republican is the new gay" in Hollywood. Poor thing.

It's noteworthy that the Invisible Hand of the Free Market, that never-failing indicator of what's good and what isn't, seems to have placed this laugh riot at a rather modest 9th place on its opening weekend. It was, admittedly, competing in a field of such long-awaited cinematic blockbusters as "Beverly Hills Chihuahua", so there is that consolation. With a box office take of $3.8 million, even with a respectable 1600 screens showing it, it'll be a while before the $20 million production budget comes in.

(For those interested in such matters, that's roughly $2300 per theater. The other political piece in play at this time, Maher's "Religulous", has pulled $3.5 million - in 500 theaters. Or, roughly, $7000 per theater.)

They'd better have a good DVD distribution deal - perhaps a two-for-one with "Expelled"?

[Jack Batty]

Personally, I wouldn't care if this starred Michael Moore. I just don't think I can take one more idiotic re-working of A Christmas Carol.

[LonesomePolecat]

It finished ninth (http://www.boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/) this weekend with gross receipts of $3,810,000.

I give it a C-. Watchable, but just barely. It has some great bits--the scene with Dennis Hopper shooting zombie lawyers from the ACLU had me rolling in the floor--but too many of the gags fall flat. If you lean heavily to the right, you might want to rent it when it goes to DVD. Otherwise, give it a pass.

[DoctorJ]

David Weigel of Reason magazine has one reason why conservative humor falls so flat these days (http://culture11.com/node/32569?page_art=1):
Political comedy mocks authority. Conservative comedy in the Age of Bush venerates authority. The “heavies” that corrupt Malone and (temporarily) ruin the lives of his conservative extended family are powerless, silly activists. Malone simply gets slapped around a bit and decides the establishment was right. If you transported Zucker back to 1978 and pitched him Animal House, he’d direct Niedermeyer: Man of Iron.

[Reno Nevada]

Well, here is a link to rottentomatoes, if you want to avoid Daily Kos: An American Carol (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/an_american_carol/). When I looked at it, it was at a slightly less than stellar 16%.

That said, Neidermeyer: Man of Iron should be hysterical.

[NDP]

Well, here is a link to rottentomatoes, if you want to avoid Daily Kos: An American Carol (http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/an_american_carol/). When I looked at it, it was at a slightly less than stellar 16%.
Man, even the "Right-Wing Moonie Paper" (a.k.a., The Washington Times) hated it. That's really striking out with your core audience.

That said, Neidermeyer: Man of Iron should be hysterical. I would've paid to see that. Too bad it took 30 years for someone to think of it.

[Cisco]

All this bickering is evidence of why it was a horrible idea to make the main character Michael Moore. How many of you would go to the theatre to see it if it was Generic Liberal? I would. David Zucker is hilarious. We all love Airplane!. Now his movie is all about another guy who does or doesn't speak for liberals and does or doesn't hate America and is or isn't a fat slob and damnit if you see it/don't see it you're a mean/gay/mindless/elitist/hillybilly/asshole ah hell, screw it, let's just wait for the DVD. Or maybe they'll show it on tv sometime.

[DoctorJ]

It turns out that the lousy box office may not have been because the movie stunk up the place--it was FRAUD! And SABOTAGE! (http://americancarol.com/fraud/)
We have had heard from numerous people across the country that there has been some ticket fraud when buying a ticket for An American Carol this past weekend.

Please check your ticket. If you were in fact one of those people that were "mistakenly" sold a ticket for another movie please fill out the form below. Hold on to your ticket so we can have proof.

If you have noticed other irregularities with the theatres in your area please let us know in the comment section below. For instance, Rated R film rating (when in fact we are rated PG-13), posters not being up, not being listed on the marquee, image or focus problems, sound issues, etc.

Please email us a picture of your ticket stub to fraud@americancarol.com

We are investigating.
Got that? It's a CONSPIRACEH! The pimply-faced teenagers have joined forces with the MSM and the terrorists to make their cinematic opus look like a flop! How else do you explain the success of Beverly Hills Chihuahua?

And can you imagine sound and focus problems at a modern multiplex? It had to be on purpose!

[Cisco]

It turns out that the lousy box office may not have been because the movie stunk up the place--it was FRAUD! And SABOTAGE! (http://americancarol.com/fraud/)

Got that? It's a CONSPIRACEH! The pimply-faced teenagers have joined forces with the MSM and the terrorists to make their cinematic opus look like a flop! How else do you explain the success of Beverly Hills Chihuahua?

And can you imagine sound and focus problems at a modern multiplex? It had to be on purpose!

I hate to rain on your parade but it's not unprecedented . . .

[Hentor the Barbarian]

Well, what did they have to say about it on the Half-Hour Comedy Hour?

[LonesomePolecat]

It turns out that the lousy box office may not have been because the movie stunk up the place--it was FRAUD! And SABOTAGE! (http://americancarol.com/fraud/)

Got that? It's a CONSPIRACEH! The pimply-faced teenagers have joined forces with the MSM and the terrorists to make their cinematic opus look like a flop! How else do you explain the success of Beverly Hills Chihuahua?

And can you imagine sound and focus problems at a modern multiplex? It had to be on purpose!Having worked in several book stores, I saw clerks and managers who put conservative books in the most obscure places possible or even not put them out on the shelves at all, claimed the books were out of stock when asked, and "lost" the order forms when customers tried to special order the books. I don't have hard time believing that some people working in theaters might try to sabotage the receipts for a movie if they didn't like its politics. (That said, the film really is surprisingly inept for people who were supposed to be professionals.)

[Acsenray]

Unfortunately, the movie fails in implementing the essential element of satire -- the kernel of truth. The movie depicts a filmmaker who is trying to get rid of the Independence Day holiday. How does this work as a satire or parody of Michael Moore? Regardless of what you think about his movies, the policy positions and political opinions that Moore espouses are quite mainstream. To depict him in this way just fails as a caricature -- it makes the filmmaker look foolish.

[MovieMogul]

I hate to rain on your parade but it's not unprecedented . . .Yeah, but when Spike Lee complains about it, he gets passed off as a whiny liberal crybaby who's scared of the free market...

[DoctorJ]

Having worked in several book stores, I saw clerks and managers who put conservative books in the most obscure places possible or even not put them out on the shelves at all, claimed the books were out of stock when asked, and "lost" the order forms when customers tried to special order the books. I don't have hard time believing that some people working in theaters might try to sabotage the receipts for a movie if they didn't like its politics. (That said, the film really is surprisingly inept for people who were supposed to be professionals.)
I wouldn't be surprised at all to find that some people sold tickets for other movies instead of AAC, or deliberately left it out of focus, or whatever. Hell, I would have been tempted.

But I can't believe it happened on a level that made any difference.

[Scupper]

From the people who brought you "Scary Movie 3" comes a parody of A Christmas Carol, but with a faux Michael Moore as Scrooge in a conservative morality farce!

How could that not be a box office smash?

Jesus. Even if I had Ann Coulter tattooed on my left butt cheek, read nothing but the Drudge Report and had FOXNEWS on my TV 24/7, I'd avoid this like the plague.

I mean, is there anybody, liberal or conservative, who actually wants to see more Michael Moore?

[LonesomePolecat]

From the people who brought you "Scary Movie 3" comes a parody of A Christmas Carol, but with a faux Michael Moore as Scrooge in a conservative morality farce!

How could that not be a box office smash?

Jesus. Even if I had Ann Coulter tattooed on my left butt cheek, read nothing but the Drudge Report and had FOXNEWS on my TV 24/7, I'd avoid this like the plague.

I mean, is there anybody, liberal or conservative, who actually wants to see more Michael Moore?
Well, Zucker was part of the team that gave us Airplane! and The Naked Gun, so I figured there was a chance he might hit another one out of the ball park. Instead, the film has a rushed feeling to it, like it was all slapped together at the last minute in a huge hurry. Some of the gags work, most don't. It feels like a Three Stooges two-reeler that somebody tried to expand to feature length, but couldn't come up with enough good material to do it. Some of the material would probably have worked very well as sketches on Mad TV or Saturday Night Live, but there's not enough to sustain a feature film, and the production values are pretty poor. Like I said earlier, if you lean pretty heavily towards the right, you might get a few laughs out of it. Otherwise, leave it alone.

I really wanted to like this film, too. Damn.

[ArizonaTeach]

This film was made for me.

I have no desire to see this film.

[NDP]

(That said, the film really is surprisingly inept for people who were supposed to be professionals.)

So they've gotten to you too!

[Jack Batty]

Quite honestly, the first time I saw the trailer, it didn't even dawn on me that it was leaning one way or another. That is, I certainly didn't see it and say, "aha, those dirty conservatives ..."

I saw the obvious spoof of Michael Moore, but I took it as more of a spoofing a spoofable public character, like Paris Hilton or OJ Simpson or something.

The only knee-jerk opinion I formed was what I said before -- another fucking A Christmas Carol re-work?

Not to mention that my kids loved the original Scary Movie spoof and they made me watch it (and actually the first one wasn't that bad, only because it hadn't really been done like that in quite a while). And now there is this myriad, legion, plethora, sea, ocean of really bad spoof movies and I'm getting sick to death of them on that criteria alone.


Politics didn't come into it for me when making a snap-judgment. It was my anti-shitty-spoof-movie nerve that was struck

[LonesomePolecat]

Politics didn't come into it for me when making a snap-judgment. It was my anti-shitty-spoof-movie nerve that was struckIt really is a tired genre, isn't it?

[sqweels]

It's just so laughable that conservatives can find so little to criticize that they have to go after Michael Moore again and again, ad nauseum.

[Cisco]

Yeah, but when Spike Lee complains about it, he gets passed off as a whiny liberal crybaby who's scared of the free market...

Not just Spike Lee. It happened to Howard Stern's Private Parts (pretty sure this was proven somehow but I wouldn't even know where to start looking for a cite) and ISTR it happening to Fahrenheit 9/11 (ditto re: cite.) It's not that uncommon. I think we've even had threads around here where cinema employees have said it happens. It doesn't even have to be out of politics - the theatre gets a different take on different movies at different times in their run.

[Long Time First Time]

You're as deceptive as he is, congratulations.
Here's a question for you: In the 1880s a group of mercenaries led by AMERICAN William Walker tried to take over Nicaragua. Should Nicaragua have blamed the US government for this and declared war on us? I mean, Walker and many of his followers were from the US. By your "logic," they should have declared war on us and treated us like we wanted them all dead...

No, by his logic they should have declared war on Canada and treated Canadians like they wanted us all dead. They should have extended most privileged nation status to us.

[stolichnaya]

The good news is that forcing laughter is a very good way to build lung capacity. Why, Sean Hannity can inflate a hot water bottle.

[Bridget Burke]

Hm. Rik says true, Dio says false.

In the meantime, a group of (mostly) Saudis, led by Osama Bin Ladin (a Saudi) and primarily funded by Saudis, hijacked American planes and flew them into the Twin Towers, killing our fellow Americans (albeit New Yorkers. Dub in Pace commercial -- "Get a rope!").
Our response as a nation is as follows: evacuate as many Saudi bigwigs and members of the Bin Ladin family as we can as soon as the "no-fly" period ends, invade a neighboring country that the Saudis are on bad terms with, exempt the Saudis from strictures on human trafficking, remove any references to the Kingdom from the official 9/11 report, and sell them arms.
I can understand why/how Texans would be alright with this course of action, and angry with Moore for snitching it out... but how about patriotic Americans?

This Texan isn't angry with Moore at all. And shares Natalie Mains' opinion of W.

And is really amused when the usual rightwing dunderheads froth at their mouths about successful filmmakers & musicians who don't share their reverence for idiocy.

Read more about Texas (http://www.texasobserver.org/) here....

[ArizonaTeach]

It's just so laughable that conservatives can find so little to criticize that they have to go after Michael Moore again and again, ad nauseum.As opposed to unique and creative ways to misspell "Bush" and "McCain"?

[Bridget Burke]

How is it a straw man? The two incidents have people from one nation attacking another without the permission or sanction of their home country. He thinks we should have blamed and attacked Saiudi because some of the hijackers were Saudi. I am asking whether Nicaragua should have attacked us because Walker was American. I understand that he and you don't like the quesiton because it would make you contradict yourself, but that's your problem, not mine.

Sampiro pointed out your error in #34, but apparently you missed that post.

If you're going to use an historical example (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Walker_(soldier)), getting the dates wrong by several decades doesn't help your argument.

[Acsenray]

As opposed to unique and creative ways to misspell "Bush" and "McCain"?

Yeah, anger at a filmmaker is exactly comparable to anger at the people who are actually running the country. This is just another arm of the culture war. Don't look at the man behind the curtain -- the guy who is really affecting your life; instead, froth at the mouth over someone who hates America.

[FriarTed]

I saw it. I smiled a lot. I laughed some. I cringed during the 1968 musical number. I wish it had been a better movie. It was OK. Wait for the DVD or a TV showing.

Judge Dennis Hopper blasting away at Zombie ACLU lawyers trying to tear the Ten Commandments off the courthouse wall was pretty cute.

Leslie Nielsen is showing his age. Thinking I may put him on the 2009 Celebrity Death List.

[ArizonaTeach]

Yeah, anger at a filmmaker is exactly comparable to anger at the people who are actually running the country. This is just another arm of the culture war. Don't look at the man behind the curtain -- the guy who is really affecting your life; instead, froth at the mouth over someone who hates America.Or come up with a zinger that you think is clever but everyone else rolls their eyes at? Is that what you mean? 'Cause that's what I mean.

Wassa matter? No sense of humor?

[DKW]

Gads. I watched the entire Naked Gun trilogy (which had a ton of politically incorrect, scathing, and just plain friggin' weird moments), and I found them all dependably funny. Now the same creative team has come up with...this.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to watch it if I thought it'd be any good. I've always been a sucker for parody. But everything I've heard about this has set off my alarm bells:

- Michael Moore (Malone). Total, total cop out. They picked someone who they knew conservatives would despise and loathe and hate and believe any and all bad press about despite anything he's actually done.
- And they may as well have gone with a generic liberal or even an outright strawman, as Moore has never been blatantly anti-American. The idea that refusal to see any kind of flaws with one's country is treasonous, or even at all wrong, is utterly ridiculous and should've been dead and buried even before Dubya's reelection. (Also echo Cisco's sentiments here.)
- What's with the extremely tired victim mentality? Dubya has been in power since 2000, and until 2006 has been aided by a compliant Republican Congress. THEY were the ones who got us into an unspeakable boondoggle in Iraq, didn't do a thing to bring Osama Bin Laden to justice, set up illegal wiretaps, torture rooms, Guantanamo etc. etc., not a filmmaker who's done more to improve peoples lives than all these reporbates put together. Isn't it time we all realized that in the grand scheme of things, slightly slanted documentaries and badly run colleges just aren't that freaking important?
- Bringing up World War 2, and seemingly ignoring EVER DAMN WAR America has been in since. This smacks of not only laziness, but utter cowardice. Yes, I think almost all of us can agree that World War 2 did a lot of good (and I'd also argue that the Korean War was positive on the balance). This isn't the war millions of liberals have protested, let alone are protesting now. You want a conservative viewpoint? Bring Iraq into the picture. Explain to Mr. Malone how the lives that were lost and the billions spent were worth it. Turn him on THAT (and make it funny!), and you'll have said something meaningful. I'm not paying seven bucks for a bunch of freakin' motherhood statements.

I dunno, guys...I'll forgive a lot in a movie for the sake of entertainment (note the positive reviews I gave to the Fast and the Furious movies on imdb.com), but it looks like this movie simply doesn't have a clue. Frankly, I don't think conservatives really have anything to work with on the humor front (a belief began, of course, with Mallard Fillmore).

Bargain bin pickup? Wait for a Blockbuster Video special? What do you think?

[devilsknew]

I think I'm going to watch the recently released DVD, Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay rather than see this, it sounds like it's actually funny and apolitical.