27 total posts
2006 - Death Of A President
""""Winner of the International Critics' Prize at the Toronto Film
Festival," "DEATH OF A PRESIDENT" is conceived as a fictional TV
documentary broadcast in 2008, reflecting on another monstrously
despicable and cataclysmic event: the assassination of President George
W. Bush on October 19th, 2007. The "documentary" combines archival
footage and carefully composed interviews, presented in a respectful and
dignified manner. Exciting and questioning, it refashions the event
into a riveting story.
"Death of a President" was honored by The International Critics Prize
Jury (FIPRESCI) at Toronto for "the audacity with which it distorts
reality, to reveal a larger truth."""""
Peter Howell of Toronto Star
"Every thinking person should see Death of a President."
Kam Williams of News Blaze
"This ethically-debatable masterpiece is an intelligent political
potboiler which makes some very powerful statements about the Patriot
Act, the erosion of our Constitutional rights, and the abuse of power."
Sam Adams - Philadelphia City Paper
"As Bush lands in Chicago, 2007, the streets are filled with protesters chanting "Chicago hates Bush!" The president's limousine is attacked by protesters who somehow break through the security cordon, and although Bush makes it to his intended destination, a speech to a group of high-priced fat cats, he is felled by a rifle shot while shaking hands outside the building."....Bush's murder comes across not as chickens coming home to roost, but as the work of a wild animal whipped into a rabid heat, and it leaves a sick taste in your mouth. In a way, it's as much an advertisement for allowing Bush to finish out his term as the words "President Cheney.....In some ways, D.O.A.P. 's predictions are too tame; considering the outrageousness of its "what if...," it's a bit of a letdown to find the Cheney administration merely expanding the Patriot Act. (No internment camps? No forced deportation? Dream a little, guy.) "
(by Jim Emerson)
Editor, RogerEbert.com / September 12, 2006
More coverage of the 2006 Toronto International Film Festival can be found at RogerEbert.com editor
Jim Emerson's associated blog,
TORONTO -- "Death of a President," the documentary-style speculative fiction about the assassination of the 43rd President of the United States, is seamless, intelligent and maybe even necessary to an understanding of George W. Bush's role in the world today, and his place in the wider scope of history. ....The scenario is a familiar one: What would happen if a much-hated world leader was killed in office?....There's no reason to be threatened by this film, any more than there was to be by "United 93" or "World Trade Center." It's responsible and observant about the world we live in -- and it's certainly not going to give anybody any ideas they haven't had already. """
Utter, unmitigated tosh. Rob
I think I'll join Toni
Your post is 5 years out of date, it was about Bush's assasi
nation. The movie was made in 2006, and set in 2008. Didn't know you were interested in Historical fiction.
the 2006 movie presented for contrast
The reaction by some "critics" of an entire movie about a supposed presidential assassination (while he was still president) compared to the reaction of a hacked Twitter account in today's world. Does that contrast upset you too much?
RE: President Obama Has Been Assassinated
The Secret Service said Monday it will investigate the hacking of Fox's
political Twitter account over updates claiming that President Barack
Obama had been assassinated.
Play your cards right and they might be investigating you?
There's nothing to investigate. It's just an outbreak of
Out of date?
That article was posted on July 4th 2011.
As far as I can tell, James' top post is relevant and timely.
Timely but irresponsible as well
Whoever did this would have known it was a deliberate hoax. Why this particular news network was targeted may be another topic of conversation. If it was for purposes of sabotage, I expect a lot of squirming by some to defend the action.
Well the article was irresponsible certainly.
So was James' tabloid headline
I have to disagree.
James posted the link and nothing else. The subject line got my attention of course, but no harm done in my view.
I might suggest, if this can be agreed upon
that the title of the post be edited to reflect the untruth. If I google that exact title, it's currently at the top of the list, in bold, and pointing to Cnet Speakeasy forums. Something tells me this doesn't look good.
I see it at bottom of the list
The List on Google
That was the title of the article when I found and linked it. It's been edited several times since then including a title change on the article. If you check the first comments under the article you can ascertain there was a different title on the article than now appears, such as people saying they nearly had a heart attack, another who hates Obama saying he cheered till he started to read the article, etc. Unfortunately in this new electronic media, unlike in old printed media, the story changes, sometimes so that even comments to it earlier seem in error when read later until or unless one realizes the electronic media was updated and changed from what it had been. I'm reminded of that famous headline in a newspaper about Dewey Defeats Truman. In today's world that headline would have disappeared and not even been a part of historical amusement anymore.
That was the title of the article when I found and linked it
And after you read it and posted...You believed Obama had been assassinated?
how about this for a subject line?
Hackers take over Fox site, send bogus tweets of Obama's ***
This is a copy/paste of your suggested title. I hope the forum censors let this pass. If not, try it yourself. it comes off as;
Hackers take over Fox site, send bogus tweets of Obama's a^s^s (without carets)
I see it located differently in FF and IE
I don't know why that happens. Eventually it may disappear. It only happens if I copy/paste your exact title. When I first saw your post, I immediately went back to a news site but saw nothing about it. It was only then that I clicked your link as I wasn't interested in "Twitter" anything as a news source and I expected the title to be misleading.
I can see your point
and I took this further. It is agreed, for this topic, that it can stay as it is.
It is part of history now, and changing it will change the context of some of the replies. The link explains it all, so no harm done.
Besides, if the topic was changed, we would then force reality into a new direction. We would all disappear, and new 'we's would take our place.
I hate to tell you this but
new "we"s are already out there somewhere and your lucrative career as an SE MOD will someday disappear. Hope you've put something away for possible forced retirement.
Who are you?
"Why this particular news network was targeted":
"Why this particular news network was targeted"
I'd guess to try and create embarassment to FOX news, but something as serious as what they "tweeted" is outrageous no matter who did it. Hopefully they will catch the ones responsible.
I beg to differ, Fox News is never timely,
and the story wasn't about President Obama except in James Denison's wish filled mind.
It was a story about a 5 year old film about a Bush assassination. So what is relevant and timely about that.
Columbia releases films about giant sharks ravaging New England beaches. Beware, Beware, don't go in the water. A timely warning for vacation goers.
It is a comparison
As you were already told, but your mush-filled mind can't seem to grasp that. It is the comparison of a few Tweets to an entire movie on the same subject regarding sitting presidents. I'm sorry you haven't the capacity to understand that.
Let's not hear about Hoover from you anymore
when Obama administration is being criticized for their policies in the worst economic situation since the Depression, since it doesn't meet your "timely" concept.
Screen capture of the Tweets
HE'S ALIVE!!!!......Not even injured.
Since no one else has said it.