Michael Moore to film sequel to Fahrenheit 9/11

You mean there is more?

Published on November 12, 2004 By historyishere In Politics

Michael Moore has confirmed he is working on a sequel to F 9/11 called F 9/11 1/2 with the backing of Harvey Weinstein which will be ready in 2-3 years, which is going to be largely the same targets as the original film.

Moore's rationale, in his own words:

We want to get cameras rolling now and have it ready in two, three years. We want to document it. Fifty-one per cent of the American people lacked information (in this election) and we want to educate and enlighten them. They weren't told the truth. We're communicators and it's up to us to start doing it now. The official mourning period is over today and there is a silver lining - George W. Bush is prohibited by law from running (for presidency) again.

A good move or a bad one, you decide.

Comments (Page 1)

bakerstreet

on Nov 12, 2004

OMG... lol.

The fact that they used the word "enlighten", and that they are even trying to do this in the first place, shows that they learned nothing from Kerry's defeat. If I were Democrats I would be trying to find out if there is Republican backing for the next movie, considering how well it motivates Republicans and how little effect it seems to have on Democrats...

Dr Guy

on Nov 12, 2004

Bad news for the democrats. But like the hollywood elitist, he cant stand not being in the spotlight.

DId you notice that they are still trying to call the original a documentary? Even Moore has backed off that lie.

historyishere

on Nov 12, 2004

I wonder how many people in the 51% that voted Bush saw the movie(meaning they aren't really his kind of audience)

Myrrander

on Nov 12, 2004

I don't know if this is such a good idea or not, I mean F 9/11 didn't really seem to do much for the cuse of the Democrats. If Michael Moore wants to do something good for the country, then perhaps he should just go ahead with his planned documentary on the health system, "Sicko."

historyishere

on Nov 12, 2004

I think I would be uncomfortable with him taking my side in a cause now.

terpfan1980

on Nov 12, 2004

Reply #5 By: Myrrander - 11/12/2004 12:34:39 PM
I don't know if this is such a good idea or not, I mean F 9/11 didn't really seem to do much for the cuse of the Democrats. If Michael Moore wants to do something good for the country, then perhaps he should just go ahead with his planned documentary on the health system, "Sicko."

Only if he volunteers as a candidate for medical experimentation.

Master of the Obvious

on Nov 12, 2004

Cant he just accept the loss already. Think about it he want everyone to vote his way because that is the only right way ... wait what type of government is that agin?

Moderateman

on Nov 12, 2004

Micheal Moores malicious mouth masticating more malfeasence, for an already lost cause, geeee who would have thought that the liberal left are sore loosers?

Castle

on Nov 12, 2004

I was expecting that the democrats would begin moving in a different direction and reevaluate their tactics over the next 4 years. Moores latest statements and his promise of a sequel to 911 seem to suggest that this isn't happening. Note to Moore: Smashing your head into a wall is counterproductive and painful. Doing it again usually yields similar results - but if you must, smash away

Seriously though, I do hope that the core of the democratic party puts some distance between their message and the Moore types that, IMHO, poisoned the well for them.

Deference

on Nov 12, 2004

Yes, Moore is so unpopular that he's grossed millions on his multiple films spanning over a decade, written many 5 best selling books, and has yet to be sued for libel or slander. Damn that successful Micheal Moore talking all sorts of shit I don't agree with...

Angloesque

on Nov 12, 2004

I find it interesting that he is planning to show the "truth", to "educate and enlighten" people on the next three years of Bush's term--that almost makes him sound, y'know, objective. So I hope he'll be as objective making the second one as he was making the first one.

-A.

drmiler

on Nov 12, 2004

Reply #12 By: Angloesque - 11/12/2004 1:54:11 PM

I find it interesting that he is planning to show the "truth", to "educate and enlighten" people on the next three years of Bush's term--that almost makes him sound, y'know, objective. So I hope he'll be as objective making the second one as he was making the first one.

NOT! Since when is lying being objective?

historyishere

on Nov 12, 2004

If I was really, really cynical... ok, screw it, I am.... I would say that Michael Moore is smelling the green... and he realizes that he might be able to make even MORE money than he did by making a sequel than by making a wholly different project.

Castle

on Nov 12, 2004

Interesting how many libs dont see it this way when big business owners are raking in millions in ways they dont agree with.....hmmmm
I guess some people can have it both ways

whoman69

on Nov 12, 2004

While I certainly don't agree with Moore, and he probably got more people to vote for Bush than against, he does make a good point. There was a poll published just before the election that stated that 75% of Bush supporters think the the war on Iraq and the war on terror were linked and that a similar number believe that Saddam Hussein played a role in 9/11. Never saw the film because I believe it caused a backlash because with the kernels of truth, he put forth more nuggets of lies and misleading statistics.

From his viewpoint, he would be stupid not to make a sequel since this is far and away his most profitable film.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!