Is being internally consistent on a one page blog about your movie too much to ask for? Apparently it is for Director David L. Cunningham.
On the "Path to 9/11" blog, the director makes two contradictory statements:
First, on his 8/29/06 post he tells us that the movie is going to present, and I quote: "unvarnished truth." Sounds good to me.
But, facts are stubborn things, and people start identifying all the things that are made up out of whole cloth and placed in the move as fact. So, the Director begins to defend his movie and we end up with his 9/2/06 post wehre he states: "It seems that people keep referring to this movie as a "documentary". A documentary is a journalistic format that gives facts and information through interviews and news footage. This is a movie or more specifically a docudrama. Meaning, it is a narrative movie based on facts and dramatized with actors."
Yes, well, why do think everyone thinks it's a documentary? Could it be the whole advertising campaign that presents it that way? Could it be your OWN WORDS where you tell everyone you are going to be presenting the "unvarnished truth?"
Your movie is either fact or fiction, you can't have it both ways. You can't say it's "mostly fact" because no one can tell what line in the script is from the actual 9/11 report or from your imagination of what happened. So get over your surprise and defensiveness for being called out for your own crap. Try being honest next time: either honest in the film you make or honest in how it's advertised.
13 comments:
I attempted to leave comments on his blogs comments section, but it is a "moderated" comments section and who knows if my comments will show up.
Good news:
Educational media giant Scholastic, Inc. announced it's dropping its original classroom companion guides to a controversial new docudrama, and replacing them with materials stressing critical thinking and media literacy.
“After a thorough review of the original guide that we offered online to about 25,000 high school teachers, we determined that the materials did not meet our high standards for dealing with controversial issues,” said Dick Robinson, Chairman, President and CEO of Scholastic, in a press release.
The original materials had been criticized for oversimplifications and failures to address flaws in post-9/11 policies, including the invasion of Iraq.
As long as he reveals the truth . . . Stingrays I tell you!
What the hell is up your ass anyways, AV?
Why is everything about the post 9/11 failures?
Clinton lied all the time.
Clinton asked for the word 'is' to be defined and snubbed his jolly red nose at our justuce system.
Now, because some wack job makes a movie that is filled with lies, you have to tag the Irq war to it.
Tell you what, the next car accident you see, get out and tell the injured parties about how, if we hadn't gone to war with Iraq, more money might have gone into automotive safety.
At first you were merely an annoying naysayer. Now, you're REALLY reaching.
The guy made a bad movie. How does that relate to post 9/11 mismanagement or Iraq?
Any excuse to bring up your pet topic, I guess...
or are you still just drawing us out and sending our names to the NSA?
I wouldn't call it a "Mix of fact-fiction" I will just say that anything related to 9/11 is not a solid fact besides the planes crashing onto the towers, that is all I saw... everything is just speculation.
Wrong.
Fact.
The hijakers were all associated with Al Queerda.
Fact.
People died. Innocent people.
Fact.
Bin Laden was involved. There are now tapes being analyzed that will prove this.
You people are ignorant and just looking ofr a hollywood moment out of a tragedy...
Fact, Stingrays coverted to Islam in 1999.
well what I said was a fact with the difference that was not spelled one by one but beside what you spelled... what else is a fact? you got what I got and anything else is just "Our and other's speculation, they are so many and maybe the reality is btw all the speculations
Murk, buddy, where did you see me tying him to Iraq? I was taking a director to task for saying he was telling the unvarnished truth, and when shown to be making shit up, he tries to change his tune to "it's just a story - it's a docudrama."
I thought this would be up your alley Murk, some windbag making shit up about 9/11.
No?
Quote:
"The original materials had been criticized for oversimplifications and failures to address flaws in post-9/11 policies, including the invasion of Iraq."
You definitely tied this issue to post 9/11 political agendas and Iraq.
I didn't make this up.
Oh, sorry, that was from the Scholastic press release; explaining why they were withdrawing their original "study guide" for the show.
But, in my defense, I wasn't the one who connected 9/11 (terrorism) and Iraq, that was the administration. It was completely factually wrong, but hey, it got them what they wanted.
Be careful what you wish for.
I got me a new 9/11 theory, debuting soon.
Today, on 9/11/2006, they referenced this "docudrama" as something quite dangerous. I'm inclined to agree with the AV.
People who don't know any better, who are ignorant, or who are just plain stupid will see this and assume it's the truth. Much like how people don't question whatever they're fed. DocuDRAMA becomes history. Unfortunate, and dangerous.
And more than a little scary.
Post a Comment