I didn't get directed by a Moore site. I was informed about the situation by my local news station.

[This message has been edited by water4me (edited 06-20-2004).]

quote:

Originally posted by dandelion:
Can anyone find out where they're all coming from?

The ether of the net? It's no mysterey just google where articles on this have been posted and find where the link to this site is also added.



[This message has been edited by chunkylimey (edited 06-20-2004).]

quote:

Originally posted by water4me:
I didn't get directed by a Moore site. I was informed about the situation by my local news station.

[This message has been edited by water4me (edited 06-20-2004).]

I came here through the BBC site, where I heard the news about Bradbury's response. Someone else I chat to said they had read stuff here through the use of just googling their way here. There is only one sad irony of all this I guess and that perhaps Bradbury himself is being censored? Maybe he has the right to express a feeling or response not matter how stupid and not be mugged online by types like myself who feel he is wrong. Perhaps when someone naive steps into the arena of politics and says something dumb the pseduo-Darwinian process of lynching the weakest should be put on hold until the iniate is a little more aware. Just because Ray Bradbury is a great perceptive author might not mean he has a clue how to cope with modern politics and the internet. I wonder if he or his press person are reading any of this?

[This message has been edited by chunkylimey (edited 06-20-2004).]

Great discussion of a very nuanced topic with lots of subtleties, which are clearly being steamrolled by the AP report.

I came to this site to see what others thought of the Bradbury-Fahrenheit911 "controversy" and am please to see so many different viewpoints.

The clearest thing here is that certain media outlets will use Bradbury's statements to discredit Moore, his movie, and his message. I do not think it is impossible to consider that Bradbury was influenced by executives at either his publishing company or the company remaking the F451 movie. Without proof though, that's total conjecture.

It's fine for Bradbury to be defensive about his intellectual property, but pro-Bush, anti-Moore legions will try to use Bradbury's recent statements as proof that Moore is clumsy in his satire, when actually I find Moore's arguements are usually very sharp, clever, and eerily true. I would really like to see Bradbury in the next week come out swinging against Bush and Co, to show that he and Michael Moore are, in fact, in the same corner of the ring.

As far as the title goes, it's not going to be changed, it's an homage to a fantastic classic of modern literature, and the message resonates on several levels. The judges and audiences at Cannes this year saw the power of Moore's work in conjunction with Bradbury's, and this week Americans will get to see it too.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr. Dark:
Censorship typically involves government's restriction of information (typically prior restriction) -- not private industry's decision as to whether or not to market a product.

They're different issues. They're related, but still different.


[This message has been edited by Mr. Dark (edited 05-06-2004).]

Obviously you are unaware of the means by which the government can censor. IN the case of Disney and Michael Moore Geb Bush the govenor of Florida has subtly threatened Disney with tax increases for their Florida resort if they backed Michael Moores project. So rather than blatantly banning the film the Bush Gestapo threatened the distributor and the distributors income. So by your definition of it being government restriction of information it is still censorship. It's just doing it by proxy and through financial threatening. So lets not just call it censorship lets add blackmail to the description as well. Got to love it though because it shows how stupid Neo-Conservative Republicans are, they make a fuss about something and it gets more attention and they are exposed as the nasty turds they are.

Cutter20,

Nice post. You and I will likely disagree on much but I admire your style. You express your opinion and recognize conjecture when you make it, all in a civil tone. A lesson the rest of our "guests" might learn from.

(By the way, I disagree that Conservatives and Bush supporters will use Bradbury's statements to discredit Moore. The whole incident, in my view, reflects poorly on Moore but doesn't directly address the content of his movie. Conservatives will have to directly confront the movie itself and I think they will. Moore's prior record with the distortion of the truth in Bowling for Columbine tells me he's likely taken liberties in this movie. We'll see how it plays out.)

Best,

Pete

quote:

Originally posted by dandelion:
Can anyone find out where they're all coming from?

If this board is like mine, the moderators/admins should be able to see the IPs of the various posters. (I'd put good money on a number of them being same person registered under different names.)


Steve Miller

Very astute, Steve.

If only they'd kept all their various ramblings on this isolated topic under this ONE heading, it would certainly be the first thread here to reach 911 posts!

I just read about Mr. Bradbury's objection to the title of Michael
Moore's film. As a fan of both Mr. Bradbury and Michael Moore I write
to urge Mr. Bradbury to withdraw his demand.

I am unfamiliar with Mr. Bradbury's politics but he must understand
thast his attack on Moore will be spun as support for the Bush
Administration and their mistaken militaristic adventure. I feel both
these author's works are done in support of human dignity and freedom.
It is also my belief that "Farenheit 451" is about the power of words
and the freedom to use them. To the extent that Moore's film title is a

reference to Mr.Bradbury's anti-fascist novel, or to Francois Truffaut's

film based on it, I urge Mr. Bradbury to see it as an homage. It is
unfortunate that Mr. Bradbury's objection will detract from the popular
reception of this highly important film.

Further, Mr. Bradbury should realize that the title, "Farenheit 9/11" is

essentially different from the title "Farenheit 451" and, unless Mr.
Bradbury has a copyright on the word "farenheit", it is unlikely that he

has any legal claim.

Just a few observations... If Moore had any ethics at all, he would have contacted RB LONG ago before using the title. Many of the so-called "facts" Moore shares in the movie are actually NOT factual, but his OPINION. (which he has admitted when interviewed) BIG difference folks. Of course he is entitled to his opinions, just like everyone else in this country. Ain't it GRAND that we can say what we want here and not be shot for it??? It just boils down to the fact that he did not return RB's calls for over six months, and now that the movie is coming out, he FINALLY makes the call? The other thing I find interesting is that on Moore's site... he has several links to various "Moore in the News" articles praising his movie, but somehow there is NOTHING on his site about RB not wanting him to use this title? That is pretty big NEWS, in my way of thinking.

For what it is worth, I wasn't urged by anyone to post here. I was hoping to write directly to Mr. Bradbury but the "contact" link was not working.

Dear Mr. Bradbury,

In light of your efforts to compel Michael Moore to apologize for borrowing his "Fahrenheit 911" title from your story "Fahrenheit 451," we are writing to inquire into the status of your own public apologies regarding your works entitled "Something Wicked This Way Comes," "I Sing the Body Electric!," "No Man is an Island" and "Remembrance of Things Future."

Sincerely,
Messrs William Shakespeare, Walt Whitman, John Donne, and Marcel Proust

The irony is Ray Bradbury's ham-handed attempt at censoring the title of a documentary that attempts to expose the lies of a censoring government.

What writer of integrity would do what Bradbury is doing? Attempting to censor the title of a documentary that attempts to shed light on an administration that is censoring truth from the American public. I should also remind you that Mr. Bradbury lifted the title for his masterful "Something Wicked This Way Comes" from Shakespeare. Should Bradbury to hat in hand with book and apology to the grave of William?

quote:

Originally posted by Bomar.Monk:
I'm actually Moore... I mean MORE disturbed that Michael Moore's title alludes to one of Bradbury's works. As far as I'm concerned, Moore could well be the best propoganda writer for 1984's ministry of information. Bradbury, on the other-hand, is a writer of integrity, real imagination, and heart.