So... My Prof Wants to Show Fahrenheit 9\11...

[jagec]

There's nothing wrong with him showing the movie, but there is certainly something wrong with him presenting it as a reliable documentary...

 

[Tylanner]

Its more of a "Shockumentary".

I'd love to see Moore attend a Senate meeting and try to make his case.

But I think most college students should be able to see F 9/11 for what it is.

 

[Kibbo]

In terms of facts, the movie is pretty ok, but it juxtaposes them order to put forth an argument that would be pretty piss-poor if written down explicitly.

Ex: Bush has been coopted by the Saudis because the Secret Service guards their embassy.

Some of the movie is pretty retarted.

It's not a problem for the prof to show it, as long as he underlines the weaknesses in it.

Edit: Misspelling of the word "retarded" left in for irony.
2nd edit: clarity.

 

[conjur]

Doesn't matter now.

Moore is a Republican now. He's been converted. He showed up on Leno last night in a suit, shaven, and a haircut. He looks like Dennis Hastert now.

 

[Tylanner]

Originally posted by: conjur
Doesn't matter now.

Moore is a Republican now. He's been converted. He showed up on Leno last night in a suit, shaven, and a haircut. He looks like Dennis Hastert now.

haha yeah that was quite shocking.

Cuz hes rolling in $$$ now, he can finally afford decent clothes:roll:

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: jagec
There's nothing wrong with him showing the movie, but there is certainly something wrong with him presenting it as a reliable documentary...

Request that it be presented as an propaganda film rather than a documentary.
If he insists that it is a documnetary, then also request that the opposing film be shown.

And also request for a discussion of the points made in the film.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Kibbo
In terms of facts, the movie is pretty ok, but it juxtaposes them in such a manner as to put forth an argument that would be pretty piss-poor if written down explicitly.

Ex: Bush has been coopted by the Saudis because the Secret Service guards their embassy.

Some of the movie is pretty retarted.

It's not a problem for the prof to show it, as long as he underlines the weaknesses in it.

Edit: Misspelling of the word "retarded" left in for irony.

The secret service did not protect the Saudi Embassy when Clinton was president, nor did the Marines target their recruiting at poorer neighborhoods when Clinton was President. The military did not use DU when Clinton was in office. Clinton never sent our troops to a country that never attacked us. And finally, under Clinton's administration, Al Qaeda never attacked America.

/sarcasm

Moore would have done a MUCH better job if he targeted his movie at our entire government, not solely on Bush. Instead, he does not look credible. In fact he looks like someone who ate someone else.

 

[CocoMunkee]

Originally posted by: bamacre


And finally, under Clinton's administration, Al Qaeda never attacked America.

Are you kidding me? Does the USS Cole or the African Embassy bombing ring a bell? Maybe they don't count since your clown prince Moore did not include it in that movie or something. Do you get your news only on lefty sites? That may explain your foolish quote.

All U Despondent Libs, Hope...

 

[yllus]

Originally posted by: Perknose
Some questions. What is the class? What is the institution? You say "Prof", so I assume it is at least a community college. I hope it's not more. Call me elitist if you wish, but using a movie, ANY movie to "teach" a college level class makes me want to weep.

So, again, what is the course and what is the institution and what is the formally defined topic your "prof" wishes to illuminate?

Thanks, I 'm not trying to thread crap, and, with more info, I will try to help.

LOL! That made my night.

It pretty much is a propaganda piece, so the correct way to present the movie (not documentary) beforehand might be to say, "Take out your pencils and papers. If you spot what you think is a flaw, write it down and we'll discuss them afterwards." Some critical analysis of a media piece plus political debate? Win-win!

 

[LtPage1]

its a very well done movie. sit back, enjoy it, laugh at the scoffing republicans, and grin at the one or two of them who take it at face value and rethink their positions.

 

[kage69]

He should be showing OutFoxed.

 

[piasabird]

How about a study on how much Hate Micheal Moore has for America.

 

[kage69]

How about a study on how much Hate Micheal Moore has for America.

...or even better, a study on why some Americans can't perceive criticism of an admin and actual hate for a nation as mutually exclusive concepts.

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

For a little clarification, the movie was grouped together with Saving Private Ryan, Schlinder's list, Amistad, Burning Mississippi, etc to help get a visual idea of what the time period was like.

I will give the instructor credit where credit was due though. She did state that the movie had a very anti-Bush bias and made that disclaimer before. Given the fact that the initial purpose of the movie was given and that students are free to bring up arguements afterwards for debate.

... beforehand might be to say, "Take out your pencils and papers. If you spot what you think is a flaw, write it down and we'll discuss them afterwards." Some critical analysis of a media piece plus political debate? Win-win!

Which is basically what we will be doing. That wasn't clarified until after I made the thread though. At the time I was under the impression that the movie would be presented as black and white facts.

Given the recent clarifications, I don't have so much of a problem with the issue.