The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
The Oscars ceremony is always full of blubbing and people showing their 'true' feelings in front of millions, so what better way to announce your horror at the war going on in Iraq? George Bush and the TV company behind the whole show didn't think so and have said for a long time that they would drown anybody out who wanted to use the event for such an outcry.
Well, they did it. I guess I shouldn't be too surprised, this being from the land of freedom and all. Whatever you think of 'stars' having their say, whether they know anything about real events going on or not, one person does know what he's talking about and was virtually guaranteed to says something should he be allowed on the podium. That person was Michael Moore and considering that the film in question was about freedom, gun laws and the general lack of moral decency that is the US government, it wasn't really surprising what happened next.
As Mr Moore spoke out about the war the big brass band piped up to drown his voice, some may say it was apt that large wind instruments were used, noting the similarity to certain people of power, but I couldn't possibly comment. What of this famous freedom of speech that the Americans are so proud of? Is it only a freedom when it suits certain people?
Though it may seem wrong for some people to criticise a war that is already going on, and even more so from some of the people who seem to live in fantasy land anyway, should it not be a right to be able to stand on a stage and voice your concern over the events unfolding? Even in this country we are being told that certain tabloids have agreed to back the war unconditionally and that the media in general has been given the order not to draw too much attention to the whole argument against such an act. Of course, the papers have never exactly been unbiased anyway, but this perhaps takes it to a whole new level not seen since the massive effort put in to the media during the Second World War, a different scenario completely.
Should this years Oscars have been controlled in such a way? No. However wrong speaking out against such a dubious war is, there should be the freedom to allow people to speak their minds at such a time. After all, isn't that part of what art is about?
Well, they did it. I guess I shouldn't be too surprised, this being from the land of freedom and all. Whatever you think of 'stars' having their say, whether they know anything about real events going on or not, one person does know what he's talking about and was virtually guaranteed to says something should he be allowed on the podium. That person was Michael Moore and considering that the film in question was about freedom, gun laws and the general lack of moral decency that is the US government, it wasn't really surprising what happened next.
As Mr Moore spoke out about the war the big brass band piped up to drown his voice, some may say it was apt that large wind instruments were used, noting the similarity to certain people of power, but I couldn't possibly comment. What of this famous freedom of speech that the Americans are so proud of? Is it only a freedom when it suits certain people?
Though it may seem wrong for some people to criticise a war that is already going on, and even more so from some of the people who seem to live in fantasy land anyway, should it not be a right to be able to stand on a stage and voice your concern over the events unfolding? Even in this country we are being told that certain tabloids have agreed to back the war unconditionally and that the media in general has been given the order not to draw too much attention to the whole argument against such an act. Of course, the papers have never exactly been unbiased anyway, but this perhaps takes it to a whole new level not seen since the massive effort put in to the media during the Second World War, a different scenario completely.
Should this years Oscars have been controlled in such a way? No. However wrong speaking out against such a dubious war is, there should be the freedom to allow people to speak their minds at such a time. After all, isn't that part of what art is about?
ShiggyWiggyWoo wrote:
> I'd say freedom is speech is fine. But not at the oscars. This event
> is shown all around the world and there will be many who don't know
> enough to make up their own mind and to have someone elses views
> thrown on them like that is like telling people what their view should
> be.
And of course George Bush is completely impartial, and has never told his view on the issue.
> I also see it as a kick in the face to the thousands of marines, paras
> and soldiers etc who have no say in this matter and who risk
> everything while the rest sit at home and watch on television. There
> are times and places to air your views and the oscars for me isn't one
> of them.
The soldiers signed up of their own free will - it isn't conscription yet. And I don't see it as a kick in the teeth - what Michael Moore says is an opinion, not the truth. It would be a kick in the teeth to send them out there and then recall them.
Anyone else notice how he was booed as well? I'm not even sure it was real booing. Possibly edited in. They certainly played the music quickly, but for that other guy they stopped it for him to speak on the war. Where's the justice?
> I'd say freedom is speech is fine. But not at the oscars. This event
> is shown all around the world and there will be many who don't know
> enough to make up their own mind and to have someone elses views
> thrown on them like that is like telling people what their view should
> be.
And of course George Bush is completely impartial, and has never told his view on the issue.
> I also see it as a kick in the face to the thousands of marines, paras
> and soldiers etc who have no say in this matter and who risk
> everything while the rest sit at home and watch on television. There
> are times and places to air your views and the oscars for me isn't one
> of them.
The soldiers signed up of their own free will - it isn't conscription yet. And I don't see it as a kick in the teeth - what Michael Moore says is an opinion, not the truth. It would be a kick in the teeth to send them out there and then recall them.
Anyone else notice how he was booed as well? I'm not even sure it was real booing. Possibly edited in. They certainly played the music quickly, but for that other guy they stopped it for him to speak on the war. Where's the justice?
I agree, such censorship should not be used, particularly when its a adult who has an informed opinion.
Probably didn't explain it the way I meant it to sound.
If anyone unknown made that comment it would have probably been ignored by most. The fact he said it would make people who most would call stupid believe every word of it as the truth without making their own judgement of the situation.
This is what I see as been wrong.
The whole thing is to do with films, not the war or any other current event. I thought is was pretty low of him to accept his award like that.
Guess its all personal views and how you see the whole situation though.
If anyone unknown made that comment it would have probably been ignored by most. The fact he said it would make people who most would call stupid believe every word of it as the truth without making their own judgement of the situation.
This is what I see as been wrong.
The whole thing is to do with films, not the war or any other current event. I thought is was pretty low of him to accept his award like that.
Guess its all personal views and how you see the whole situation though.
ShiggyWiggyWoo wrote:
> > I also see it as a kick in the face to the thousands of marines, paras
> and soldiers etc who have no say in this matter
So they were forced to join the army and don't get paid for it? Interesting.
> > I also see it as a kick in the face to the thousands of marines, paras
> and soldiers etc who have no say in this matter
So they were forced to join the army and don't get paid for it? Interesting.
I'd say freedom is speech is fine. But not at the oscars. This event is shown all around the world and there will be many who don't know enough to make up their own mind and to have someone elses views thrown on them like that is like telling people what their view should be.
They are there to collect awards for making, staring in or being part of a film, not to share views on the situation in Iraq, what magazines they buy or what they dream of at night.
I also see it as a kick in the face to the thousands of marines, paras and soldiers etc who have no say in this matter and who risk everything while the rest sit at home and watch on television. There are times and places to air your views and the oscars for me isn't one of them.
They are there to collect awards for making, staring in or being part of a film, not to share views on the situation in Iraq, what magazines they buy or what they dream of at night.
I also see it as a kick in the face to the thousands of marines, paras and soldiers etc who have no say in this matter and who risk everything while the rest sit at home and watch on television. There are times and places to air your views and the oscars for me isn't one of them.
You do raise some interesting points, however I thought that it was pretty interesting that they actualled gave Micheal Moore the Oscar, or even allowed him to collect it live. I saw his protest last night. In the short time that was available he didn't really do very much except have a contravertial view, and I expected nothing less.
The Oscars ceremony is always full of blubbing and people showing their 'true' feelings in front of millions, so what better way to announce your horror at the war going on in Iraq? George Bush and the TV company behind the whole show didn't think so and have said for a long time that they would drown anybody out who wanted to use the event for such an outcry.
Well, they did it. I guess I shouldn't be too surprised, this being from the land of freedom and all. Whatever you think of 'stars' having their say, whether they know anything about real events going on or not, one person does know what he's talking about and was virtually guaranteed to says something should he be allowed on the podium. That person was Michael Moore and considering that the film in question was about freedom, gun laws and the general lack of moral decency that is the US government, it wasn't really surprising what happened next.
As Mr Moore spoke out about the war the big brass band piped up to drown his voice, some may say it was apt that large wind instruments were used, noting the similarity to certain people of power, but I couldn't possibly comment. What of this famous freedom of speech that the Americans are so proud of? Is it only a freedom when it suits certain people?
Though it may seem wrong for some people to criticise a war that is already going on, and even more so from some of the people who seem to live in fantasy land anyway, should it not be a right to be able to stand on a stage and voice your concern over the events unfolding? Even in this country we are being told that certain tabloids have agreed to back the war unconditionally and that the media in general has been given the order not to draw too much attention to the whole argument against such an act. Of course, the papers have never exactly been unbiased anyway, but this perhaps takes it to a whole new level not seen since the massive effort put in to the media during the Second World War, a different scenario completely.
Should this years Oscars have been controlled in such a way? No. However wrong speaking out against such a dubious war is, there should be the freedom to allow people to speak their minds at such a time. After all, isn't that part of what art is about?
Well, they did it. I guess I shouldn't be too surprised, this being from the land of freedom and all. Whatever you think of 'stars' having their say, whether they know anything about real events going on or not, one person does know what he's talking about and was virtually guaranteed to says something should he be allowed on the podium. That person was Michael Moore and considering that the film in question was about freedom, gun laws and the general lack of moral decency that is the US government, it wasn't really surprising what happened next.
As Mr Moore spoke out about the war the big brass band piped up to drown his voice, some may say it was apt that large wind instruments were used, noting the similarity to certain people of power, but I couldn't possibly comment. What of this famous freedom of speech that the Americans are so proud of? Is it only a freedom when it suits certain people?
Though it may seem wrong for some people to criticise a war that is already going on, and even more so from some of the people who seem to live in fantasy land anyway, should it not be a right to be able to stand on a stage and voice your concern over the events unfolding? Even in this country we are being told that certain tabloids have agreed to back the war unconditionally and that the media in general has been given the order not to draw too much attention to the whole argument against such an act. Of course, the papers have never exactly been unbiased anyway, but this perhaps takes it to a whole new level not seen since the massive effort put in to the media during the Second World War, a different scenario completely.
Should this years Oscars have been controlled in such a way? No. However wrong speaking out against such a dubious war is, there should be the freedom to allow people to speak their minds at such a time. After all, isn't that part of what art is about?