Any money Moore makes will be based on the merits of his film and not due to some very small connection to 451.

Here's what an author friend of mine wrote this morning:

If I wrote a story about a man freezing in the north woods
and called it Farenheit 32, wd Bradbury moan and bitch
about that? Does he claim he owns the Farenheit scale??
Shd other writers only use Celsius or Kelvin scales????
Oi weh what an Ego.........

Treetop,

MM's film wasn't about temperature. He used it because of RB's work.

[This message has been edited by Faler (edited 06-26-2004).]

Again, teetop. You and your friend completely misconstrue Bradbury's position on this, and then attack that miscontrued position. Really quite bothersome and tedious. If you want to argue facts, great; but you're just mistating his position.

"So, you are saying that Ray Bradbury should just sit back, watch Michael Moore make millions of $$$$ off of his title, all in the name of 'patriotism'?"

Hey John: Bradbury's title is F451, not F911. Maybe you didn't notice the difference. I wasn't aware Ray needed more money, Should I send him a check so he can eat? Are you his keeper?

Obviously your problem is not with the title, but with the politics. So how about a little honesty on your part.

"You must be a white man. There's a book about you written by MM."

Yes, I am white and male. (What about you?) Please tell me if you have a problem with that. I have tried to be as civil as possible. Why don't you try it before siding with all those who complain about uncivil MM fans.

Below is a link to some late night reading citing viewer response, across the country, to F911. I am eager to see a corresponding outpouring enthusiasm for ANYTHING else that dares to use Mr. Bradbury precious title. But I won't hold my breath
http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/latestnews/breakingnews/

I find it ironic that F451 (which I have never read) refers to the flash point of paper, an allusion to book burning and censorship; and flies in the face of everything F911 is about. I mean you didn't really expect the docile, cowardly mainstream media to tell you the truth, did you?

These are NOT Bradbury fans. Don't care for him as a man, and are out and out throwing trash.

Every generation has these folk. Every icon has them staring outside the edge of their books, every President has them, everybody has a foe in his list of friends.

Bradbury exuded an expression of friendship in his writings thruout all the years. All these tarnished brain waves above have ever done is thier single silly posts. Afraid to leave their name.

If you want to copy someone's title:

1)
Don't copy a similar title when he's still alive.
2)
Or when production of the movie, ''Fahrenheit 451'', a Mel Gibson production, has already begun, and you knew before hand it was about ready to begin. Now that's down right in your face nasty.

Here's a concept. Stop fretting about Ray Bradbury's fragile ego and your precious little bulletin board, and wake up to the fact that your democracy is being strangled to death by war mongers and profiteers.

War mongers and profiteers? Seems like an opinion. Anyway, you're right, the best way to deal with you is to not pay any attention to what you say on the bulletin board.

OK, I admit, I am another new visitor looking for a bit of perspective on this matter. But I'm confused why this is getting so aggressive, as if Moore set out to attack Bradbury, rather than pay him tribute.
Moore obviously thought that Bradbury's book was so well known and respected, that referring to it (not copying it exactly) was a perfect shorthand to sum up the suppression of free thought and free speech that he believes has emerged in the US since 9/11. Whatever you think of Moore, you have to agree that his success (sales/box office/awards) is a result of the triumph of free speech. The fact that Bradbury did not take it as a tribute is a disappointment to Moore, but it is just too late to rename it now. I admit that though I read F451 some years ago, I am not familiar with other Bradbury books. Are his principles really so different to Bradbury's?

I might add that I am not from the US, so don't identify as either a liberal/Democrat or conservative/Republican. I'd be very interested to read opinions about this that move beyond the fundamental political divide that seems to drag down these discussions (ie. "you're a Democrat/Republican, therefore I dislike you and disagree with whatever you say on principle").

Thanks folks,
V

Word
Warrior

War mongers and profiteers?

You mean like in Abraham Lincoln's time in office? People north and south hated him. Half the country was going to split. Over slaves, money, and land.

You mean like in a dozen other Presidents?

I worried about being blown away by nuclear exchange when I was in school. Came within less than an hour. We used to hide under our school desks.

War saved America from the depression.
What a horrible way to get back to work, eh?

How about the Mexican -American war?

This is relatively new: people can't think straight, on a large scale, due to freedoms of the press. Psyche wards are full of people addicted to the free press of porn. You don't think so? Contact your local Sex-Addicts Anonymous chapter. They are in every city, and pattern their programs after Alcoholic's Anonymous.

Old stuff?: Alcohol destroys lives all over the world. You have any in your family?

Some want 'under God' obliterated from any printed or coined money...where's freedom of the press on printed money? You say...."Seperation of church and State?" Hmm! It wasn't so when the country was founded. 'Seperation of Church and State' back then meant ... the State would not interfere in the activities of the Church. When did all that get turned around? Can you tell me if you are a history buff?

Word
Warrior

You are directing us to fight a battle that has been ongoing since the beginning of this country. Let's throw in the grand conquering kings throughout history as well. Ronald Reagan was considered from the very beginning and thruout his Presidency a war-maniac, that was going to ignite World War 3. Well, it didn't, at least according to some. Nixon believed World War 3 had been going on a long time.

You got something new to deal with the darkness of man's soul? New answers to old old problems?

Like, how come African-American's are doing something about the darkness, so verbal about their freedoms taken away? Even today...they are involved in litigation with companies that originally dealt in slave traffic...
...While indigenous people, like the Indians, remain relatively silent. Gee, we only took ALL their land away (oh, yes, there are a couple reservations around, arn't there? Woopie!) And killed millions, some historians say ...as many as 14,000,000 million.

Let's hear something new. Good luck!




[This message has been edited by Nard Kordell (edited 06-27-2004).]

Dear Nard,

Some wars are necessary, some not, and all are said to be--rightly so, I believe--hell on earth.

Bottom line, as I see it: Violence breeds violence. And as human beings, divinely created and inspired, we can do better.

I've pretty much said what I have to say on Mr. Bradbury (who I admire as an author) and his demand for an apology from Michael Moore.

Moreover, I don't want--or think you want--to turn the board into a debate on politics.

Have fun. And, as Plato said, "Be kind. For everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle."

-Word Warrior

p.s. As for "something new," all I can suggest is that each moment is new, and rich with possibilities. Seize them. --ww


[This message has been edited by Word Warrior (edited 06-27-2004).]

My own view on war is that war may sometimes be necessary, and it may sometimes be justified, but it is always hell.

It is perhaps the ultimate act of collective de-humanization.

Vincent,

Since you're new to the board and may have not had the time to fully review the threads, you'll find things have gotten to this point for this reason: This site was invaded by MM supporters who went on the attack against Bradbury. Bradbury's supporters responded. It escalated from there.

For the most part, you'll find most of the posts from MM supporters that were civil and reasoned were responded to by Bradbury's supporters in kind (or not responded to, since not every post requires a response.)

In short, as someone much wiser than I predicted, this site will settle down after a while and get back to the business of discussing Bradbury related ideas. In the meantime, you can expect some lively debate about subjects that may not seem to have much to do with Bradbury.

Best,

Pete

Pete, Mr. Dark,

All well said. Perhaps some good to come out of it all--at least for me--is that I fully intend to read F451.

Cheers,
Word Warrior

[This message has been edited by Word Warrior (edited 06-27-2004).]

Thanks Pete.
I did have a browse through the threads, and yes there are some civil and reasoned messages. But when people get aggressive - as Word Warrior says -
"Bottom line, as I see it: Violence breeds violence. And as human beings, divinely created and inspired, we can do better."

This obviously applies for verbal violence as well as physical, and YES, we can do better. Argue the ideas, don't attack the speaker. I would still like to hear from the more aggressive regulars like Dandelion and Nard on my question - isn't Mike Moore's success a result of the free speech and free market that America values above all? Why else would he name his film by "quoting" the title of a seminal work on the suppression of ideas?

I totally understand that you're feeling your community has been invaded by infidels (!), but yes, it will pass. Though you can be sure that new readers will come here via Moore's reference, once they go and read F451! I too will be re-reading it now.

V