Cinematical

We in the US will probably never be able to see "DAOP" because we are such a FREE country. Anybody that wants to see it would be deemed a terrorist threat or enemy combatant or commie pinko... whatever the name, they will most certainly hate freedom, simply by desiring to view it.

Reply

Oops I meant "DOAP". Gotta go, the Thought Police are at the door.

Reply

A movie about the assassination of Billy Bush - now that I'd pay to see.

Reply

Does anyone else find this extremely poor taste? Regardless of your political beliefs, if you are a US citizen you should find a movie about the assassination of a current President to be in poor taste.

It's sensationalistic, bandwagon "hate Bush", mob mentality.

Terrorists already use Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 to recruit and brainwash. What do you think will happen with a movie about assassinating the President will do? It's irresponsible and thoughtless.

Reply

Depends how they do it. Yes, it could be hatemongering. On the other hand, it could be a good look at the differences between the modern day and the times surrounding Kennedy's assassination. Certainly with the way the media would handle the two events.

It's important not to try to pre-empt this with opinions. Let the film come out, then judge it.

Reply

I don't know about anyone else, but the assassination of GWB is my worst nightmare.

For guess who becomes president then?

Reply

I like President Bush and it doesn't bother me that this movie might come here to the states, because it is just a movie, I guess we shouldn't have any movies where actual places or people are represented.. we should just stick with reality tv, now that is art... lol

Reply

You guys are freakin rediculus and whats wrong with america today. Freakin start blowing everything out of perportion. I bet you just cant wait to see the movie.

Reply

@ isaiah...

Who's ridiculous?

And I'm quite happy with being "whats wrong with america today". I'm British.

Speaking of which, the Tony Blair version sounds potentially good. David Blunkett (our blind ex-home secretary until his departure following a series of ill-advised... ah... decisions)had a show devoted to him recently, which made for top satire.

However, Blair's so vilified in the press at the moment that any satire's going to have to work hard to say anything new.

Reply

I believe in freedom of speech and I'm not a fan of Bush, but I still find this extremely offensive. It's not just Anti-American, it sounds like Pro-Terrorism. I do not support this film in ANY way, shape, or form.

Reply

This film sounds interesting and a serious piece of work. Here's more information from today's Guardian:

More4's chief, Peter Dale, said the headline-grabbing conceit was used as the hook for an intelligent examination of American politics. "It's a mixture of a gripping detective story and a political examination of what the war on terror is doing to the American body politic," he said.

Gabriel Range, director of the film, said: "Inevitably there will be people offended by the premise. But anyone who does see the film will recognise that it's not a personal attack on Bush but an oblique way of exploring the direction his foreign policies have taken us."

Channel 4 could also face a potential boycott from major US advertisers nervous of being associated with the film. Mr Dale said: "I'm sure there will be people who will be upset by it. But when you see it, it's not sensationalist or exploitative. It's a very powerful and thought-provoking drama." Mr Range was previously responsible for the BBC film The Day Britain Stopped, a similar exercise in which documentary-style techniques were used to recreate the aftermath of a collision between two aeroplanes in the skies above London.

Any views on whether a broadcaster will pick this up for showing in the US?

Reply

I agree with the comment by LD. I am not in favor of Bush at all, but I think this movie, however well made, is in poor taste.

Reply

I think why it bothers me is that it is using the real, sitting President. I don't think it would bother me if it was a fictionalized (though obviously based on) character.

I think the film, though described as examing the current American body politic, is really just a reflection of the current "hate America" European view of American politics. Like I said, mob mentality.

I can't judge the movie just yet, only the premise and what the filmmakers say about it. I will probably watch it when and if it's released to the US market. I won't make a judgment of the movie itself until then.

For the flimmakers to say it's not sensationalistic is intellectually dishonest IMHO. They know precisely what they are doing and the emotions they will create, both good and bad. They are making it documentary style (not a drama as they described) with the current President because it's got a shock value. That's sensationalism.

Reply

I think the concept is intoxicating, provocative even exhilerating. I wish I had thought of it. My hands are sweating

Reply

@LD

"Terrorists already use Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 to recruit and brainwash."

You have got to be kidding me?

Fictional president or not, what's the big deal? Nobody thought we were "emboldening the enemy" when Air Force One came out. Get a grip people, the marketing machine that is western media has no effect on terrorist organizations. If so, we would've been bombed after every J-Lo film.

Reply

I think Seighton is quit funny, nice incorporation of Farhenheit 451.
Anyhoo, point is, whether you like the idea or not, Michael Moore is allowed, oh, excuse me, SHOULD be allowed to make a movie about the assassination of whoever the hell he wants to. I don't particularly agree with the assassination of presidents, nor do I agree with all the other violence, excessive drug abuse, and pornography in films, but hey, that all appears in the movies too. We're lucky we're able to express our views and America would do better if they weren't always trying to suppress others who don't agree.

Reply

I don't see why everyone is getting so offended by this film...

I see it as being like a modern version of George Orwell's 1984; it takes social tensions from today's society and plays out one possible future scenario. Just because the character is a real person doesn't mean the movie isn't FICTION. Interesting, hopefully well done, thought-provoking fiction, but fiction nonetheless. If he'd used a fictional character that obviously represented Bush, everyone would be talking about how it's obviously an attack on Bush's term. Using the real deal let's him avoid those kind of assaults on his character.

I agree, too, that it would be a very, bery bad thing if something like that actually happened...

*shudder* Cheney as President... and we thought Canada looked good before.

Reply

Bad taste? More like catharthis. Most of us in the US want to see Bush's ideas die, and that would suffice without downing the Decider himself.

Reply

For all of you who are going on about how offended you are at the premise of this film:

You mean to tell me you are not at all offended by the 'documentary' that's coming to ABC about how 9/11 is all ex-president Bill Clinton's fault? And you expect us to believe that you are not at all partisan in your comments?

It's stated very clearly that the presidential assassination is a 'hook' and that the film is an examination of American politics. So, they've admitted is a speculation piece. Yet, you have nothing to say about a speculation piece that proposes it is fact.

If you must point fingers, YOU are what is wrong with America, and we are desperately trying to get rid of you before you cause our demise.

Reply

I'm sorry, but I have to strongly disagree with any film that implies or even engages in the horrific assasination of my Commander In Chief. Yes we live in a free nation, but that nation was also purchased with a price. Everyone should be free to see this film if they wish, but I would never endurse or condone agreeing with its message. Whether you agree with the president's policy in foreign matters or not, he is still the president and that in and of itself warrants my respect. Heck, I at least had respect for clinton because he was my president and I couldn't stand the guy's policies. His wife is worse, by the way. As for the terrorists act of 9/11, I can only say that it has never been America's policy to slap the wrists of an attacking country and send them marrily on their way and it never will be. No, We inforce justice as we have the right to. If some robber broke into my house to hurt my family, I'd blow them right out the front door with a 12 gauge so that it'd never happen again. We have to be that way with terrorists so that 9/11 never happens again. Also, the last time I checked, I haven't been hearing the new Iraqi government asking us to leave their sovereign nation yet, so us still being there is at their request, not the president's "oil ties" as is so popular to speculate about.

Reply