BOX OFFICE SUMMARY: F 9/11
Box Office Total: $119,078,393
Box Office Opening: $23,920,637
No. of Weeks at #1: 1
No. of Weeks in Top 10: 6

I have a hard time believing he will match that success.

His movie paralleled the phenomenon of political books. People buy a lot of that tripe just to see for themselves. If Rush Limbaugh had to rely on charisma and the quality of his prose to sell books, he'd be self-publishing. Same goes for 90% of the pundits that drag thier editorial out to 200 pages and call it a book.

People don't like car accidents, but they stop to look. Micheal Moore is a car accident. A spectacle that enrages more people than it pleases might make money, but it doesn't achieve political aims... obviously...

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.

I think you hit on something there. I bought F 9/11 and I did not find it to be completely without value -- however, it just seems strange that he wants to do another one and cover the same topics. I agree, too, that he is not doing the Democrats any favors by continually trying to "champion their causes."

Like it might be different if he investigated why Bush won(the failure of the democratic party) or something in that area... but doing the same topic for a movie... well, that just seems to be a little... greedy... I mean, he might really come off like he is grasping for straws... even if he discovers something huge(which is unlikely).

I posted a similar article before you, historyishere. How come everyone response to yours, and no one response to mine. Maybe they were all asleep when I wrote that (5:00AM)

Money, Money, Money, Money.....

Has any body ever thought that maybe the guy is really a Republican Capitalist?

In his statement he even says "truth" and to "educate and enlighten" 51% of the people, just after those same types of words have inflamed people’s opinion on the DNC.

He has given no money to charity from the proceeds from the movie and gets $15,000 to $30,000 for each university speech he does, even before he adds in ticket sales. From what I have read he has not even given money to the DNC, but says his movies are his donations. He didn't even pay for his seat at the DNC convention like most other visitors did.

The man makes more money when the Republicans are in office then Democrats.

It is my belief that the man is really just a Republican claiming to be carrying the Democratic flag. Oooh, he is carrying it strait to a nice fat bank account.

That's My Two Cents

I posted a similar article before you, historyishere. How come everyone response to yours, and no one response to mine. Maybe they were all asleep when I wrote that (5:00AM)

Post a link here.... I read what you had to say and it was interesting stuff.

One thing you all have to remember... there is a far right and far left. Micheal Moore is far left. He's the easy target and the easy one to to use when conservaties try to "paint by number" a democrat. We could do the same if dems focused on the far right.

Well, perhaps another figure will emerge from the darkest wings of the Right to serve that purpose...

I think it can fairly be concluded that Moore is a nothing more than a money-grubbing hypocrite. Can't even get the number right - it was 52%, Mikey.

Cheers,
Daiwa

1% denial

Reply By: drmiler Posted: Friday, November 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?

*sigh* Sarcasm doesn't lend itself to the blogsphere.

-A.

Reply #29 By: Angloesque - 11/12/2004 8:49:51 PM Reply By: drmiler Posted: Friday, November 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? *sigh* Sarcasm doesn't lend itself to the blogsphere

I wasn't being sarcastic! I was being truthful.

1% denial

Cheers,
Daiwa

*sigh* Sarcasm doesn't lend itself to the blogsphere.

Sure it does