Thanks for the post. I think that's really all most of Bradbury's supporters were asking for so good for Michael Moore.
But lest the touchy-feely goodness last too long, may I suggest Mr. Moore's supporters take a look at this link? http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/
It's a review of the movie by Christopher Hitchens, a far left writer. So maybe Ray was onto something when he took umbrage to Moore's "hijaking" of his title.
Best,
Pete
Posts: 547 | Location: Oklahoma City, OK | Registered: 30 April 2002
Thanks for the post. I think that's really all most of Bradbury's supporters were asking for so good for Michael Moore.
But lest the touchy-feely goodness last too long, may I suggest Mr. Moore's supporters take a look at this link? http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/
It's a review of the movie by Christopher Hitchens, a far left writer. So maybe Ray was onto something when he took umbrage to Moore's "hijaking" of his title.
Best,
Pete
Hitchens isn't a far left writer, he defected to the right wing some time ago. Google him up.
No need to google him; I'm a fan so I'm well aware of his "defection" from the Left. As he stated in his essay, "Goodbye to all that," he sees it as the Left leaving him rather than him leaving the Left. He's still quite the Lefty. But, admittedly, maybe not Left enough for you. Even such, what would you disagree with in his review of Michael Moore's movie?
Best,
Pete
Posts: 547 | Location: Oklahoma City, OK | Registered: 30 April 2002
Mr. Bradbury has been a joy and inspiration to me for at least 25 years now, and it was strange to see him getting huffy over this.
Certainly one can understand why he didn't *like* the title thing, and Moore was a jerk not to get back to Mr. Bradbury for so long, but it's clearly a protected use.
Ray must have been having a grumpy day :-p
Posts: 1 | Location: Brooklyn, NY | Registered: 22 June 2004
It's a review of the movie by Christopher Hitchens, a far left writer. So maybe Ray was onto something when he took umbrage to Moore's "hijaking" of his title. [/B]
Moore's dishonesty is also being pointed out in this week's Newsweek in an article by Michael Isikoff.
When you are a left-wing propagandist and people from the left are ripping you a new one for being dishonest, you know you've got trouble.
How many bad reviews would do it for you? Newsweek may not be as far left as you'd like but they're left enough for me. And Hitchens remains pretty far left. Witness his awful take on Reagan during the Reagan funeral. (Awful not necessarily for content, which is, well, awful, but mainly for its timing. Best to keep one's mouth shut if one can't find something good to say about the dead, I always say.)
I've posted elsewhere that MSNBC reports about 80% favorable reviews. I've also noted the favorable reviews I've read actually appear quite mixed. So the movie's by no means a slam dunk. Still it's surprising when you find lefties who refuse to stay on the reservation. Sort of a man bites dog kind of story.
Best,
Pete
Posts: 547 | Location: Oklahoma City, OK | Registered: 30 April 2002
Hitchens is an idiocynratic writer, to put it mildly. He resigned from the left-liberal Nation a couple years ago because of the rightward drift of his politics. Though he did write the tasteless obituary on Reagan, that really reflected his old politics and nasty personal disposition. Since 9/11 he's really become an apologist for the Bush administrations handling of the War on Terror, this piece is consistent with that as well.
Posts: 17 | Location: nowhere, AK | Registered: 24 June 2004
Hitchens article was spot on and pretty virtuouso. I wouldn't want to get on his badside!
I think Moore is basically a self-serving coward. He panders to his dittohead fans. Never takes risks. Now he is threatening critics and avoiding debate. I hope Hitchens gets the chance to debate him, but Moore being a coward it will likely never happen. http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/5355/Moore_Fahrenheit911_2b.jpg
Posts: 11 | Location: London | Registered: 20 June 2004
)