![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Ranty-Rant-Rant
Jun. 29th, 2004 03:06 pmDoing some fanlisting maintenance last night I came across a site and it's blog. I was glancing at the most recent entry in which the person in question was talking about Michael Moore's latest documentary, Fahrenheit 9/11 and about Bush.
She managed to complain that she felt that Michael Moore was cashing in on the tragedy, as well as with Bowling For Columbine. Now, I'm not sure if she ever saw how much Columbine made, but the $28 million during it's entire domestic run isn't exactly that much to make you a wealthy person in movie-making land, especially seeing as most of that goes to cover costs, and then gets eaten by the studios. So F9/11 is doing much better than BFC, raking in more than BFC's entire domestic run in the first weekend... but still, to charge a documentary maker with "profiting off the tragedy" is a bit rich. I didn't see her indict the cable newsmedia over that, and they surely get revenue from well watched broadcasts, nor did I see her complaining that other documentary or movie makers are profiting over whichever subject they portray in their latest piece, nor did I see her complaining that Mel Gibson made money over Jesus' back by having people sit through quite a bit of graphic torture with The Passion Of The Christ... and pretty much all the profits for that movie went straight into the Gibson coffers, not the studio. I'd say $300+ million bucks is really profiting, don't you?
She also hasn't seen F9/11 yet, so any claims on what the movie does or doesn't do are a bit stupid anyway, and she wasn't planning on seeing it because she didn't want to financially support Moore. Well, she wasn't going to watch it in theatres, she'd wait til the dvd came out and rent it then. Ah yes, principles :P At least he makes less off her renting it than going to theatres, I guess that's all that matters.
To add to that she went on to comment about why she supported Bush... which boiled down to "I have to support my fellow Christ-lover". Err... does she pay ANY attention to US politics? Have you ever seen a president or viable presidential candidate that was not Christian? Outwardly at least. Maybe they don't throw "God Bless America" and other religious reasonings into their speeches *quite* as much as Dubya does, but the vast majority of politicians in office in this country are definitely on the books as being Christian. Though Kerry's a Catholic, maybe that's not the right kind of Christian for her.
And finally, she bitched about the fact that Dubya gets made fun of for looking/acting stupid, and quoth something to the effect of "so he choked on a pretzel, and he's not a great public speaker... what do you expect?". Well, I expect a hell of a lot fucking more from someone who is supposed to represent the leader of the free world, of one of the most powerful nations in the world, and someone who is the public face of a country to its outside neighbours. He's the president for chrissakes, it's part of the fucking job description that you do public speaking! Plus as governor of Texas he already had quite a bit of training methinks. Having him choke on snackfood, while accidental, is just downright embarrassing, much like Yeltsin's vodka-induced stumble at some summit where he had to be caught and steadied by some minder must have been a pretty embarrassing moment for many Russians. But I guess I have to wonder if she's even really old enough to remember that particular news bite. Personally I expect a little more from my public representation, especially at its highest level like the president. I like them to be intelligent and articulate and not embarrass the fuck out of me and my country towards others. That's their job, that's what they get paid for, and I'm definitely not unreasonable in requiring those small things.
I'm fine with people having reasons for doing stuff, by all means, but it's just when their reasonings are so completely flawed logic wise, like the Christ-lover thing that it gets to me.
She managed to complain that she felt that Michael Moore was cashing in on the tragedy, as well as with Bowling For Columbine. Now, I'm not sure if she ever saw how much Columbine made, but the $28 million during it's entire domestic run isn't exactly that much to make you a wealthy person in movie-making land, especially seeing as most of that goes to cover costs, and then gets eaten by the studios. So F9/11 is doing much better than BFC, raking in more than BFC's entire domestic run in the first weekend... but still, to charge a documentary maker with "profiting off the tragedy" is a bit rich. I didn't see her indict the cable newsmedia over that, and they surely get revenue from well watched broadcasts, nor did I see her complaining that other documentary or movie makers are profiting over whichever subject they portray in their latest piece, nor did I see her complaining that Mel Gibson made money over Jesus' back by having people sit through quite a bit of graphic torture with The Passion Of The Christ... and pretty much all the profits for that movie went straight into the Gibson coffers, not the studio. I'd say $300+ million bucks is really profiting, don't you?
She also hasn't seen F9/11 yet, so any claims on what the movie does or doesn't do are a bit stupid anyway, and she wasn't planning on seeing it because she didn't want to financially support Moore. Well, she wasn't going to watch it in theatres, she'd wait til the dvd came out and rent it then. Ah yes, principles :P At least he makes less off her renting it than going to theatres, I guess that's all that matters.
To add to that she went on to comment about why she supported Bush... which boiled down to "I have to support my fellow Christ-lover". Err... does she pay ANY attention to US politics? Have you ever seen a president or viable presidential candidate that was not Christian? Outwardly at least. Maybe they don't throw "God Bless America" and other religious reasonings into their speeches *quite* as much as Dubya does, but the vast majority of politicians in office in this country are definitely on the books as being Christian. Though Kerry's a Catholic, maybe that's not the right kind of Christian for her.
And finally, she bitched about the fact that Dubya gets made fun of for looking/acting stupid, and quoth something to the effect of "so he choked on a pretzel, and he's not a great public speaker... what do you expect?". Well, I expect a hell of a lot fucking more from someone who is supposed to represent the leader of the free world, of one of the most powerful nations in the world, and someone who is the public face of a country to its outside neighbours. He's the president for chrissakes, it's part of the fucking job description that you do public speaking! Plus as governor of Texas he already had quite a bit of training methinks. Having him choke on snackfood, while accidental, is just downright embarrassing, much like Yeltsin's vodka-induced stumble at some summit where he had to be caught and steadied by some minder must have been a pretty embarrassing moment for many Russians. But I guess I have to wonder if she's even really old enough to remember that particular news bite. Personally I expect a little more from my public representation, especially at its highest level like the president. I like them to be intelligent and articulate and not embarrass the fuck out of me and my country towards others. That's their job, that's what they get paid for, and I'm definitely not unreasonable in requiring those small things.
I'm fine with people having reasons for doing stuff, by all means, but it's just when their reasonings are so completely flawed logic wise, like the Christ-lover thing that it gets to me.
