| Author |
Message |
    
Director
Citizen
Username: Director
Post Number: 6
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 25, 2005 - 6:22 pm: | 
|
Well said Straw - "Film sucked, Moore sucks, libs suck"
Moore needs a total body and mind make over. He is a self indulgent overweight, SLOB!
|
newone
Citizen
Username: Newone
Post Number: 197
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 25, 2005 - 7:41 pm: |
|
Off topic (somewhat) - didn't the guy who started the Razzies come from Maplewood? |
LibraryLady(ncjanow)
Supporter
Username: Librarylady
Post Number: 2139
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 25, 2005 - 7:49 pm: |
|
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6866948/
Passion of the Christ also wan't nominated for much. |
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 1938
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 25, 2005 - 9:04 pm: |
|
For a guy who made a mediocre movie, full of (according to Republicans) fallacies, and who is, apparently, not really respectable in any way, it is really something to see how much the Republicans obsess over him. Always good for a guffaw. |
Brett Weir
Citizen
Username: Brett_weir
Post Number: 550
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 25, 2005 - 10:39 pm: |
|
Michael Moore and Mel Gibson had one thing in common- Indie filmmakers rarely get nominated because they work outside the Hollywood mainstream. Every Academy voter is employed in the industry, and Indie films are generally low-budget and employ minimal workers. Politics aside, neither of their films is "good for business". Blockbusters do. That's why a pile of dung like "Titanic" (breath-taking effects, insipid story and acting) sweeps the awards.
Gibson, of course, knows this from his "Braveheart" turn; Moore is astute enough to figure it out. Both men made monumental films nonetheless. Politics aside. |
Phenixrising
Citizen
Username: Phenixrising
Post Number: 345
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 8:00 am: |
|
Straw=jerkyboy=nails=Director?
Seems the kid has morphed himself into another character 
Brett,
I agree with your statement. |
Director
Citizen
Username: Director
Post Number: 7
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 8:23 am: |
|
Nope I am not Straw. But thanks for the complement! |
Mark Fuhrman
Citizen
Username: Mfpark
Post Number: 1197
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 8:35 am: |
|
Wonder what Chris Rock will have to say about Michael Moore....... |
Sgt. Pepper
Citizen
Username: Jjkatz
Post Number: 587
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 10:59 am: |
|
I especially love it when Repubs cite Moore's weight as proof of his lack of credibility. |
overtaxdalready
Citizen
Username: Overtaxdalready
Post Number: 337
Registered: 6-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 11:09 am: |
|
From today's WSJ:
"That Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" was shut out from the Academy Award nominations yesterday should come as no surprise. All the members of the Motion Picture Academy had seen it.
It is now being said that Mr. Moore overreached by removing his picture from the documentary category to try for best picture. Our own view is that Mr. Moore deserves credit for the honesty implicit in withdrawing his movie from the company of documentarians. Indeed, on leaving the movie we wondered why it wasn't being picketed by the documentary-makers guild, whatever their politics.
Documentarians tend to be serious about their craft. Mr. Moore is slovenly. His movie opened with unflattering scenes of high Bush Administration officials, moments before TV appearances, being daubed with makeup, saying silly things. Every member of the Academy has done this and, notwithstanding the chuckles, would have recognized it as sophomoric, meretricious filmmaking.
Ultimately, Mr. Moore's fatal misunderstanding was of Hollywood itself. To be nominated for an Academy Award, Mr. Moore had to win the election. You can say many things about Hollywood, but there is one Tinseltown verity that will never change: It doesn't reward losers."
|
Director
Citizen
Username: Director
Post Number: 8
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 11:16 am: |
|
I was trying to be nice by calling him overweight. I wonder if he can fit into a regular size chair or airline seat? Face it ... your outward appearance says alot about you. He obviously indulges in a lot of over eating, lacks self control, unkempt and is FAT (PC TERM: horizontally challenged or person of substance)!
|
Phenixrising
Citizen
Username: Phenixrising
Post Number: 349
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 11:18 am: |
|
I especially love it when Repubs cite Moore's weight as proof of his lack of credibility.
Yup!
Hmmm…wonder what Bush's excuse is for lack of credibility.
O yes, thats right! He's phonically challenged, doesn't read much, he's a below average student and he's not FAT. 
|
Phenixrising
Citizen
Username: Phenixrising
Post Number: 350
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 11:25 am: |
|
Straw=jerkyboy=nails=Director
Funny how your rhetoric sounds all the same.
So who will be your next character? |
Director
Citizen
Username: Director
Post Number: 9
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 11:34 am: |
|
It's not just Michael Moore's "FATNESS" that gets to all "repubs" and give his less creditability. He has the most twisted brain and thoughts around (except for maybe a few posting on MOL).
|
Robert Livingston
Citizen
Username: Rob_livingston
Post Number: 762
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 11:40 am: |
|
Michael Moore took home Best Picture at the People's Choice Awards, voted on by 21 million people. The first documentary to win the award.
Documentaries are never slated for a Best Picture Oscar, and Moore pulled his out of the running for Best Documentary. |
notehead
Supporter
Username: Notehead
Post Number: 1945
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 11:44 am: |
|
I suspect that Moore made himself such an easy target (in terms of filmmaking, not in terms of size, ahem) because he employed the sort of oversimplification and dumbing-down techniques that come out of the Republican playbook (think "Clear Skies" and "spreading freedom").
Bush's victory shows that it works for Republicans, Moore's People's Choice Award showed that it can work for others, if they decide to take that route. |
Sgt. Pepper
Citizen
Username: Jjkatz
Post Number: 588
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 11:47 am: |
|
I bet that even with his large size, it would have taken Michael Moore a lot less than SEVEN MINUTES to get his ••• out of that chair after being told his country was under enemy attack. |
Robert Livingston
Citizen
Username: Rob_livingston
Post Number: 764
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 11:48 am: |
|
(And really, Director, as I said in another thread, should the party of Rush Limbaugh worshippers really be throwing poundcakes around?) |
Michael Janay
Citizen
Username: Childprotect
Post Number: 1481
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 11:55 am: |
|
Back in the 80's the peoples choice for best actor was between Stallone for "Rambo" and Chuck Norris for "Missing in Action". As I recall, Stallone won... and I think one year Clint Eastwood and Burt Reynolds tied for best actor.
Millions voted then too. |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 643
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 11:59 am: |
|
So Michael, Could those be the same millions of people that voted for Bush?
It was just too easy... |
Phenixrising
Citizen
Username: Phenixrising
Post Number: 353
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 12:23 pm: |
|
I bet that even with his large size, it would have taken Michael Moore a lot less than SEVEN MINUTES to get his ••• out of that chair after being told his country was under enemy attack.
 Isn't that the TRUTH! |
Michael Janay
Citizen
Username: Childprotect
Post Number: 1482
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 12:32 pm: |
|
Rastro,
Not likely... Since F9/11 won. Its pretty safe to say that few Bush supporters voted for Moores piece of garbage.
And why isn't F9/11 listed here?
http://www.cbs.com/specials/peoples_choice_awards/nominees.shtml |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 648
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 1:03 pm: |
|
MJ, my comment was about those who voted for Stallone/Norris, not F9/11.
And I never said F9/11 won a people's choice award. Perhaps you meant to address that to Notehead?
[edit] I did do a little research, since that page seems a bit old (Shrek and Pearl Harbor were a bit of a tip off, wouldn't you say?)
Try here... http://www.pcavote.com/nominees_fi.shtml |
Robert Livingston
Citizen
Username: Rob_livingston
Post Number: 770
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 1:10 pm: |
|
Janay: in the interest of clarity, your link is for the 28th Annual P.C.As. They are currently up to the 31st Annual. Take a look at the Best Picture winner in your link (Shrek). |
Michael Janay
Citizen
Username: Childprotect
Post Number: 1486
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 1:18 pm: |
|
Ooops.
I thought it was odd, but I'm not a follower of who wins what.
Wasn't Shrek out last year?
Now, if the Wiggles were nominated, I'm sure I'd know about it. |
Rastro
Citizen
Username: Rastro
Post Number: 650
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 26, 2005 - 1:31 pm: |
|
Michael.. now THAT would be scary - perhaps the sign of the apocalypse... |
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page