penfold

Well, still giving you the benefit of the doubt, and as Steve has pointed out, that's not how your original posts here and on Rotten Tomatoes came across. You seemed more intent on gaining support for your own opinion...apparently that of outrage.
Without having yet had the opportunity of seeing this film, I would suggest that generally speaking terrorists need no such encouragement; this film will not give them ideas they have not already had. Also, that the possibility or realities of presidential assassination have been a mainstay plot of mainstream Hollywood productions since DW Griffiths and Joseph Henaberry reenacted Lincoln's assassination in The Birth of a Nation.

Bit of a Bay Window, what??

WiseFilms

The "Cult of Violence" the thread-starter worries about, is a phenomenon the present companies in Washington DC are entirely comfortable with. To go as far as to say THEY are the terrorists, and Fox News, etc. is their outlet for making people (at least in my country) feel under the gun... this is something that requires more time than I have this afternoon to convince anyone of. It's an interresting question though, about who in this confused world you really need to worry about. See 'Loose Change' if you can, and tell me our corperate protectors are'nt at least as much a concern as those dusky, scatterd abstractions know as "Terrorists", "Islamo Fascists"", etc. Take a hard look if you will, at Dick Cheney, and Osama Bin Laden, and ask where are they coming from, and what do they each stand to gain from the promotion of terror, war, mass fear. It's never a good thing when a Nation's leader (whether he belongs in office or not) is shot dead. Hhummm...come to think of it, suppose how the world might be now if Reagan & Thatcher got it in the head? Maybe Never should be changed to Hardly Ever? Something to think about....

penfold

Depends on who is behind the shooting...some crazy bloke, and the world turns. Someone with the slightest connection to Moscow, and World War Three within days...

Bit of a Bay Window, what??

Marky B

Indeed,Hannibal would be offended to share space with a person of lesser intellect .
Ta Ta
Marky B

I am special. The heavens always open for me.

intelligence

penfold,

I quite dont understand why you are repeating "still giving you the benefit of the doubt" :rolleyes: Freedom of speech is a right that everybody deserves including me, but the difference is whether we listen ?

penfold

The doubt that I was giving you the benefit of, was whether you genuinely wanted to hear other people's opinions, or whether you were trying to be some sort of provocateur, or simply wanted to have your own opinions reflected back to you. You have exercised your right to free speech, no-one has decried that: I have also exercised my option to listen, it's simply that I have also exercised my right not to agree with you.

Bit of a Bay Window, what??

DB7

What precisely is your point? And out of interest... have you seen this film?

JamesM

Dear 'intelligence', have you heard of those programs that generate pseudo sentences? Your opening post looks like it has been generated by such a program. As it does not make sense, it cannot be discussed. It's quite amusing to see that some people on that other forum thought they knew exactly what it meant. We can only second guess what you are trying to say.

Penfold did not need to explain to us what he meant, we all knew what he meant. When you conjour up an image of you rolling your eyes, I suspect we all have a similar image of you only with the addition of a cuckoo popping out of your forehead every second.

If you really did construct that sentence, may I advise you to restrict your language to the use of words you understand.

"...has been alternatively derided as a tasteless publicity." You cannot end this sentence after 'publicity'. You need to continue your sentence with 'and' followed by the alternative. You cannot have merely forgotten to present the other mutually exclusive position because you would have corrected it after having posted your statement on the other forum.

Subsequently you apparantly claim that it is 'outrageous' that this film won an award at the Toronto film festival. In order to make this claim you need (a) to have seen this film and (b) seen another film in the same competition that you consider to be artisticly superior to this. Now can you answer the following questions.

1) Have you seen 'Death of a President'?

2) Which film have you seen that you believed ranked higher than 'Death of a President'?

DB7

Looking forward to seeing this on More4 but somehow doubt it will justify the hysterical reviews or match earlier 'what if' faux docs like The War Game.

David Brent

I would have thought that a film portraying the assassination of Bush would be small meat compared to the true story of how thousands of troops and innocent people have died and continue to die in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Dave.

sippog

Mmm . . . . call me cynical but I smell a viral ad campaign here.

Rennie

Come on Steve, you are once again wielding the heavy hand. I personally cannot see anything wrong in a poster using the term 'outrageous'. God I've seen worse on this discussion board which has gone unchallenged by the moderators.

DB7

No, you could be spot-on.

Sky-plused the film so will watch it soon.

JamesM

Steve isn't objecting to the use of the word 'outrageous'. He is objecting to a subsequent denial of, what is clear to us, the possible interpretation of the intent of his post.

DB7

Anyway back to the film, I thought it was overhyped and very disappointing. It looked slick but the low budget was blinding obvious (a press conference with about 10 people) and rather than 'what if' and an assassination's impact on foreign policy it became bogged down in whodunnit.