I don't see why
hmm, might have to watch that.News wrote:
The film, which has raised protests from conservatives in the US, will be shown on UK TV channel More4 on Monday.
and why is thatd3athwi5h4 wrote:
I don't see why
Spokesman Dick Westerling said: "We do not feel it is appropriate to portray the future assassination of a president, therefore we do not intend to programme this film at any of our theatres."
I feel like that pretty much sums it up for me. I just don't see the point
I feel like that pretty much sums it up for me. I just don't see the point
Fucking Aye - Ill watch it
Entertainment value for some probably.
they shoudl put it out on the DVD so at least I can rent it lol and watch it
Dead, n00b FTW!
It wasn't that long ago when something like this would have been considered sedition.
Another example of the double standard and gutter ethic of some Hollywood liberals.
Another example of the double standard and gutter ethic of some Hollywood liberals.
any other channel than 4 would surprise me, seeing as it is 4, i think i'll just choose to not watch the trash that 4 puts out and eductae myself instead of letting a twisted, bent, amoral channel do it for me.
agreedATG wrote:
It wasn't that long ago when something like this would have been considered sedition.
Another example of the double standard and gutter ethic of some Hollywood liberals.
lol
I saw it at the toronto film festival a month or so ago.
Its not all that political, it revolves more around what would happen if a president were assassinated today.
Yes, they fictionalize the assassination of bush, but its not over the top.
Sedition? It's called freedom of speech there chief.
Its not all that political, it revolves more around what would happen if a president were assassinated today.
Yes, they fictionalize the assassination of bush, but its not over the top.
Sedition? It's called freedom of speech there chief.
From what I had heard about it, that was what I understood it to be about as well. I got the impression that it didn't really matter who it was that was assasinated. So it could have been Blair, or anyone else, just that the American president is the most interesting to assasinate. Somehow, Death of an Ayatolla doesn't quite have the same ring to it.{DsM}SongofWar[BoC] wrote:
I saw it at the toronto film festival a month or so ago.
Its not all that political, it revolves more around what would happen if a president were assassinated today.
Yes, they fictionalize the assassination of bush, but its not over the top.
Sedition? It's called freedom of speech there chief.
Then why can't they just use a fictional president, like every other movie ever that has a U.S. president.{DsM}SongofWar[BoC] wrote:
I saw it at the toronto film festival a month or so ago.
Its not all that political, it revolves more around what would happen if a president were assassinated today.
Yes, they fictionalize the assassination of bush, but its not over the top.
Sedition? It's called freedom of speech there chief.
Last edited by BolvisOculus (2006-10-08 07:43:15)
Because they wanted it to be more realistic, like a documentary.BolvisOculus wrote:
Then why can't they just use a fictional president, like every other movie ever that has a U.S. president.{DsM}SongofWar[BoC] wrote:
I saw it at the toronto film festival a month or so ago.
Its not all that political, it revolves more around what would happen if a president were assassinated today.
Yes, they fictionalize the assassination of bush, but its not over the top.
Sedition? It's called freedom of speech there chief.
ah, if only it was a documentary.
If someone did it on Clinton you'd have the conservatives cheering all over the place. I think you fail to see that a lot of the time.ATG wrote:
It wasn't that long ago when something like this would have been considered sedition.
Another example of the double standard and gutter ethic of some Hollywood liberals.
such a dipshit.ATG wrote:
It wasn't that long ago when something like this would have been considered sedition.
Another example of the double standard and gutter ethic of some Hollywood liberals.
Freedom of speech ... unless the majority does not like it ...
I wonder if someone made a movie about the assasination of Kim Jong IL would people be bitching about it.
Personally, I think (in c theory) it has released muddle chatter about a real assasination ...
I wonder if someone made a movie about the assasination of Kim Jong IL would people be bitching about it.
Personally, I think (in c theory) it has released muddle chatter about a real assasination ...
Bush, whether you like him or not, is a sitting president and it will never be appropriate for this to be aired.
We, those of us in the U.S., know all too well from past history that the attempted murder or murder of a president is a reality.
All major law enforcement agencies throughout the country have stated, statistically, that threats and assassination attemps rise dramatically when the media or movie industry airs or dramatizes having harm done to the president {doesn't matter who}.
Ikarti - that was a cheap shot! I know you really didn't reach to far up your ass for that one - u r wrong!
Kaboom.
We, those of us in the U.S., know all too well from past history that the attempted murder or murder of a president is a reality.
All major law enforcement agencies throughout the country have stated, statistically, that threats and assassination attemps rise dramatically when the media or movie industry airs or dramatizes having harm done to the president {doesn't matter who}.
Ikarti - that was a cheap shot! I know you really didn't reach to far up your ass for that one - u r wrong!
Kaboom.
I'm not real dissapointed in it not being aired in the states. Id rather see Dubyah catch one in the brain in real life not in a movie. But then Cheney would be pres so him and a few others need to get it as well.
Yeah, at least they have the balls to say its a documentary, but that BS 9/11 movie abc broadcast blatantly lied. Please shut up man, you are nothing more than an internet hack.ATG wrote:
It wasn't that long ago when something like this would have been considered sedition.
Another example of the double standard and gutter ethic of some Hollywood liberals.
What are you even talking about?AAFCptKabbom wrote:
Bush, whether you like him or not, is a sitting president and it will never be appropriate for this to be aired.
We, those of us in the U.S., know all too well from past history that the attempted murder or murder of a president is a reality.
All major law enforcement agencies throughout the country have stated, statistically, that threats and assassination attemps rise dramatically when the media or movie industry airs or dramatizes having harm done to the president {doesn't matter who}.
Ikarti - that was a cheap shot! I know you really didn't reach to far up your ass for that one - u r wrong!
Kaboom.