New and "improved" BFC


PDA






MonkeyMan
September 5, 2003, 07:49 AM
It appears that Mikey Moore is reacting to some of the negative press being heaped on "Bowling for Columbine" and has released a new version with some "alterations". Here's the link:

http://www.spinsanity.org/post.html?2003_08_31_archive.html#1062477905999081

Gee, Mike, if you'd told the truth to start with ...

Never mind.:banghead:

If you enjoyed reading about "New and "improved" BFC" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
foghornl
September 5, 2003, 08:33 AM
The only way I can think of to improve BFC is to take the tape/DVD/ etc, and pound it into powder, so that no one else's eyes are ruined by it.

Triad
September 5, 2003, 11:30 AM
Moore has generally refused to concede error in response to critics, in one case writing an angry email to Chicago Sun-Times film critic Roger Ebert denouncing several charges as "Internet crap" and "not true." In subsequent correspondence for Ebert's online column, Moore wrote, "if I state something as a fact, I need the viewers to trust that those facts are correct."

Well of course you do. If everyone knew you were a liar they'd be less inclined to listen to your BS.:barf:

Elmer Snerd
September 5, 2003, 04:51 PM
MM: "Every fact in the film is true. Absolutely every fact in the film is true."
Niiiiice weaselspeak, Mikey! Those GM executives would be so proud of you. However, I'm insulted that you think I'm gullible enough to fall for that.

Spinsanity: Update 9/2 5:12 PM EST: A number of readers have written in to point out that Moore's statement is a tautology -- that is, it is correct by definition to say "Every fact in the film is true." However, in context, he implies that all of his factual claims are true -- asserting they are facts -- and attacks critics of those claims with a charge of libel. As such, we stand by the post as written.
MM: And anybody who says otherwise is committing an act of libel."
You're not trying to intimidate anyone into silence, are you, Mikey? Why not prove that your critics are wrong instead? Oh, wait, you can't.
Be careful if you take anyone to court. The court will nail you for perjury if you lie there. That's a felony, BTW. You would have to turn in that rifle from the staged bank incident. If you fake another scene like that for BFC2, it will be illegal for you to even touch the eeeevil gun.
Update 9/5 9:12 AM EST: In addition, as another reader points out, anyone who "says" something untrue would presumably be committing slander, not libel. [Note: This post was slightly edited for style and clarity.]
Sigh. Mikey, Mikey, Mikey. You LIED by deliberate commission and omission. Since it actually happened, it is neither libel nor slander to call you on it. The truth may be embarrassing, but by definition it cannot be libelous or slanderous.

gun-fucious
September 5, 2003, 05:55 PM
i never knew Andy Ihnatko was tracking MMs errors:
http://www.cwob.com/movies/oscars2003/bfc.html

Here's the procedure for the gun program, as it was explained to me:

1) You walk into the bank and ask for "the account where you get the free gun."

2) You're shown a catalogue of available products. They're famous for their guns, but you can also choose a set of golf clubs, a grandfather clock, or other expensive bric-a-brac. You pick out an item.

3) The gun isn't actually "free"; you're buying a Certificate of Deposit and the bank is paying you all of the interest from the account in advance, in the form of fabulous prizes. The bank employee knows what each item costs and calculates how much money you'll have to desposit and how long you'll have to keep it in there to pay off the gun. For instance, I was told that to get the Mark 5 Stainless Weatherby, I'd have to deposit $5697 and keep it there for three years.

4) You fill out paperwork. Two sets, actually. One is the usual paperwork for opening a CD, the second is information for the required firearms background check.

5) You go home and wait. The bank processes your paperwork, both to make sure that no other bank has ever lost money doing business with you, and to make sure that they can legally sell you a firearm. I asked the rep how long the bank took to approve a customer and get him his gun, but she was uncomfortable with giving me an actual number.

"Well, are we talking hours? Days?" I asked.

"Oh, days, definitely." Later in the conversation, she described it as "Like, two weeks' worth of days."

6) When the bank is satisfied that it's safe to issue you a CD and a gun, they notify you. You have the option of picking up the weapon at a local gun dealer or right at the bank but in either case, the weapon has to be shipped there from a different location. No gun inventory is kept at the bank; the only firearms they have on hand are display models so you can fondle the merchandise before you make a selection.

So there are obviously some major disconnects between the experience Moore presents and the experience a customer would have if they didn't appear with a film crew. Again, this is preliminary stuff: it's possible that the process was indeed just that simple when Moore came to film. But it's also possible that the bank agreed to streamline it for the purposes of filming. Unfortunately, the woman who actually chairs the program (and perhaps can speak more authoritatively) was on vacation when I called, but I've got her return-date circled on the calendar. Stay tuned.


http://www.cwob.com/yellowtext/yellowtext0303.html

Standing Wolf
September 5, 2003, 10:18 PM
Beneath contempt.

BowStreetRunner
September 6, 2003, 01:38 PM
pretty much SW

If you enjoyed reading about "New and "improved" BFC" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!