'Fahrenheit 9/11' Earns $21.8 Million in Three Days

[JoseCuervo]

Maybe the American Public isn't as apathetic as we all thought....

Pretty cool that the Number 1 Show in America this weekend is a Michael Moore film.

Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11'' took in a whopping $21.8 million in its first three days, becoming the first documentary ever to debut as Hollywood's top weekend film.

Michael Moore arrives for the preview of "Fahrenheit 9/11," in Washington, D.C.

If Sunday's estimates hold when final numbers are released Monday, "Fahrenheit 9/11'' would set a record in a single weekend as the top-grossing documentary ever outside of concert films and movies made for huge-screen IMAX theaters.

Adding the film's haul at two New York City theaters where it opened Wednesday, two days earlier than the rest of the country, boosted "Fahrenheit 9/11'' to $21.96 million.

"Bowling for Columbine,'' Moore's 2002 Academy Award-winning documentary, previously held the documentary record with $21.6 million.

"Fahrenheit 9/11,'' Moore's assault on President Bush's actions after the 2001 terrorist attacks, won the top honor at last month's Cannes Film Festival and has attracted attention from both sides in the presidential campaign.

The movie has been embraced by left-wing groups, which mobilized members to see it during the opening weekend. Conservative groups sought to discourage theaters from showing it and asked the Federal Election Commission to examine its ads for potential violations of campaign-finance law regulating when commercials may feature a presidential candidate.

"I want to thank all the right-wing organizations out there who tried to stop the film, either from their harassment campaign that didn't work on the theater owners, or going to the FEC to get our ads removed from television, to all the things that have been said on television,'' Moore said. "It's only encouraged more people to go and see it.''

The Wayans brothers' comedy "White Chicks,'' about two black FBI agents who go undercover as white debutantes, opened in second place with $19.6 million for the weekend. That pushed the total for "White Chicks'' to $27.1 million since opening Wednesday.

The previous weekend's No. 1 movie, "Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story,'' slipped to third place, taking in $18.5 million and pushing its 10-day total to $67.2 million. Steven Spielberg and Tom Hanks' "The Terminal'' fell from second to fourth place with $13.9 million, raising its 10-day gross to $41.8 million.


"Fahrenheit 9/11'' opened in 868 theaters, a wide release for a documentary but narrow compared to big Hollywood flicks. The film averaged $25,115 a theater, compared to $7,190 in 2,726 cinemas for "White Chicks.''

Distributors Lions Gate and IFC Films plan to put "Fahrenheit 9/11'' into a couple of hundred more theaters this Wednesday, when competition heats up with the release of "Spider-Man 2,'' summer's most-anticipated movie.

Lions Gate and IFC came on board after Disney refused to let subsidiary Miramax release "Fahrenheit 9/11'' because of its political content. Miramax bosses Harvey and Bob Weinstein bought back the film and went looking for independent distributors.

Estimated ticket sales for Friday through Sunday at North American theaters, according to Exhibitor Relations Co. Inc. Final figures will be released Monday.

1. "Fahrenheit 9/11,'' $21.8 million.

2. "White Chicks,'' $19.6 million.

3. "Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story,'' $18.5 million.

4. "The Terminal,'' $13.9 million.

5. "The Notebook,'' $13 million.

6. "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban,'' $11.4 million.

7. "Shrek 2,'' $10.5 million.

8. "Garfield: The Movie,'' $7 million.

9. "Two Brothers,'' $6.2 million.

10. "The Stepford Wives,'' $5.2 million.

 

[Nemont]

Wonder what the ticket sales will be in couple of weeks? Once the word of mouth starts most likely the tickets sales will drop off.

Nemont

 

[Oak]

Speaking of "The Terminal"...if any of you go see it, the guy who plays the chief Customs dude at the airport has a hardback Cabelas catalog on his desk. Watch in the "fish in the office" scene.

Oak

 

[Nemont]

Koch: Moore's propaganda film cheapens debate, polarizes nation

By Ed Koch, (former mayor of NYC)
SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM
Monday, June 28, 2004
It is shocking to me that Americans in a time of war, and we literally are at war with Americans being deliberately killed in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere by Islamic terrorists, will attack their own country, sapping its strength and making its enemies stronger. I am not a supporter of the xenophobic slogan “My country right or wrong.” But I do believe, when seeking to make it right if it is wrong, that none of us should endanger the country, our military personnel or our fellow citizens.

Disagreeing with America’s foreign policy and seeking to change it, responsibly or irresponsibly, is a fundamental right protected by the First Amendment. Shaming those who do it irresponsibly is our only lawful recourse and rightly so.

Senator John Kerry in criticizing United States’ foreign policy and the incumbent president is acting responsibly, albeit I disagree with many of his views. On the other hand, Michael Moore, writer and director of the film “Fahrenheit 9/11,” crosses that line regularly. The line is not set forth in the criminal statutes, but it is determined by Americans who know instinctively what actions and statements taken and uttered violate the obligations of responsibility and citizenship they deem applicable in time of war.

David Brooks, in a brilliant New York Times column on June 26, collected some of the statements that Michael Moore has been making in other countries which denigrate the U.S. and, in my opinion, cross the line. Brooks writes:

“Before a delighted Cambridge crowd, Moore reflected on the tragedy of human existence: ‘You're stuck with being connected to this country of mine, which is known for bringing sadness and misery to places around the globe.’ In Liverpool, he paused to contemplate the epicenters of evil in the modern world: ‘It's all part of the same ball of wax, right? The oil companies, Israel, Halliburton…We, the United States of America, are culpable in committing so many acts of terror and bloodshed that we had better get a clue about the culture of violence in which we have been active participants...Don't be like us,’ he told a crowd in Berlin. ‘You've got to stand up, right? You've got to be brave.’ In an open letter to the German people in Die Zeit, Moore asked, ‘Should such an ignorant people lead the world?’

In an interview with a Japanese newspaper, Moore helped citizens of that country understand why the United States went to war in Iraq: ‘The motivation for war is simple. The U.S. government started the war with Iraq in order to make it easy for U.S. corporations to do business in other countries. They intend to use cheap labor in those countries, which will make Americans rich.’ But venality doesn't come up when he writes about those who are killing Americans in Iraq: ‘The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not `insurgents' or `terrorists' or `The Enemy.' They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow — and they will win.’ Until then, few social observers had made the connection between Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and Paul Revere.”

Undoubtedly, too long a quote, but there is no substitute for the original.
A year after 9/11, I was part of a panel discussion on BBC-TV’s “Question Time” show which aired live in the United Kingdom. A portion of my commentary at that time follows:

“One of the panelists was Michael Moore, writer and director of the award-winning documentary “Roger & Me.” During the warm-up before the studio audience, Moore said something along the lines of “I don’t know why we are making so much of an act of terror. It is three times more likely that you will be struck by lightening than die from an act of terror.” I was aghast and responded, “I think what you have said is outrageous, particularly when we are today commemorating the deaths of 3,000 people resulting from an act of terror.” I mention this exchange because it was not televised, occurring as it did before the show went live. It shows where he was coming from long before he produced “Fahrenheit 9/11.”

Many in the audience assembled by the BBC included Americans and people from other nations. Their positive responses to Moore on this and other comments he made during the program convinced me that the producers had found a lair of dingbats when looking to fill the studio with an audience. Moore later called President Bush a “dummy,” denigrating him for having threatened Iraq with consequences including war if it did not comply with the United Nations resolutions to which it agreed when it was defeated in the 1991 Gulf War. Again, I couldn’t contain myself and said, “That’s what you radicals on the left always do. You don’t debate issues, you denigrate your opponents. You did it with President Reagan, saying he was dumb. After he left office, 600 speeches, many hand-written by him, demonstrated his high intelligence.”

In World Wars I and II, the U.S., suffering great casualties to its military personnel, saved the world, particularly in WWII, from occupation by the German Nazi Reich and Japanese empire. We currently are fighting the battle against a minority of fundamentalist Islamists whose objective is to destroy Western civilization. They are willing to use every act of terrorism from suicide bombers to hacking off heads to destroy and terrorize us into surrender. And Michael Moore weakens us before that enemy. How should we respond? With scorn, catcalls, the Bronx cheer and the truth. Of course, we should recognize the outrages and criminal acts committed by Americans in military service and civilians at the Iraqi prison Abu Ghraib. We should continue as we have done and take action to punish those involved. But we ought not in the media show again and again the pictures of the atrocities to simply flagellate ourselves and give aid and comfort to our enemies. A good rule of thumb might be to show the pictures of Abu Ghraib as many times as we show the beheadings of Danny Pearl, Nicholas Berg and Paul Johnson.

I am a movie critic, so I went to see “Fahrenheit 9/11.” The movie is a well-done propaganda piece and screed as has been reported by most critics. It is not a documentary which seeks to present the facts truthfully. The most significant offense that movie commits is to cheapen the political debate by dehumanizing the President and presenting him as a cartoon.

Newsday reported some of Moore’s misstatements as follows: “At the start of ‘Fahrenheit 9/11,’ filmmaker Michael Moore shows a clip of CNN analyst Jeffrey Toobin saying that if ballots had been recounted in Florida after the 2000 presidential vote, ‘under every scenario Gore won the election.’

“What Moore doesn't show is that a six-month study in 2001 by news organizations including The New York Times, the Washington Post and CNN found just the opposite. Even if the Supreme Court had not stopped a statewide recount, or if a more limited recount of four heavily Democratic counties had taken place, Bush still would have won Florida and the election…Moore suggests Bush's conflict of interest was manifest shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks when the White House ‘approved planes to pick up the bin Ladens and numerous other Saudis’ who, fearing reprisals, were flown out of the United States. Embellishing the well-known scenario, Moore interviews a retired FBI agent who says authorities should have first questioned the bin Ladens.

“But the bin Ladens were questioned. The commission investigating the attacks reported in April that the FBI interviewed 30 passengers: ‘Nobody was allowed to depart on these six flights who the FBI wanted to interview in connection with the 9/11 attacks or who the FBI later concluded had any involvement in those attacks’” It is clear to me from the tenor of the film’s off-screen commentary by Michael Moore that he would have denounced WW II. Did he support the United States and NATO going into Bosnia to save the Muslims from ethnic cleansing and destruction? Would he agree that we should have attempted to save the Muslim men from death at the hands of the Serbs in Srebrenica? Should we now be going into the Sudan and saving perhaps a million black Christian and Animist Sudanese from Arab marauders who are murdering, raping and starving the blacks and even selling some into slavery? Weren’t we right to go into Iraq on the basis of United Nations Resolution 1441 which stated the Iraqis had weapons of mass destruction and that was a cause for war unless they accounted for them and destroyed them, which they refused to do?

Now that no WMDs have yet been found, was the invasion to end the reign of Saddam Hussein, who had killed and tortured hundreds of thousands of his own citizens, still supportable? Moore thinks not. I think, yes.

The movie’s diatribes, sometimes amusing and sometimes manifestly unfair, will not change any views. They will simply cheapen the national debate and reinforce the opinions on both sides.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Just got back from the Theater. The theater was 75% full for the first showing on a Monday evening. People were laughing out loud at times, as there are some incredibly funny scenes.

There is also some pretty uncomfortable stuff to watch as this lady Lila Liscomb talks about Iraq.

This movie should be required viewing for anybody before they can vote for Dubya.

My guess is the movie stays pretty popular thru the week, and then you will likely have the first round of "buzz". I would bet they rush it to Video/Cable, before the elections, in order to get more people to watch it, prior to repeating the mistake of November 2000.

He has a funny line in there on the Coalition for Iraq, and how Afgahnastan is a member...

 

[Tuffbucker]

Michael Moore is a worthless piece of shit. His documentaries are nothing more that WORTHLESS propoganda. It doesnt take much to take some footage and manipulate it to make it show the political views you are trying to throw upon the people. Anyone who believes anything Michael Moore says is an idiot. The guy failed out of college in his first year. He is a fat bastard who's views in "Farenheit 9-11" have more holes in them than Swiss Cheese. If someone really wanted to take the time to do it, they could have an acurate rebuttle for anything he said in his new movie. No i havent seen the movie, no i wont ever see the movie. I's wipe my ass with the $10.00 the ticket would cost, before I wasted my time and money on his garbage.

TUFFBUCKER!!

 

[BuzzH]

Tuffbucker, let me edit your post...


Rush Limbaugh is a worthless piece of shit. His radio shows are nothing more that WORTHLESS propoganda. It doesnt take much to take some audio snippets and manipulate it to make it show the political views you are trying to throw upon the people. Anyone who believes anything Rush Limbaugh says is an idiot. The guy failed out of college in his first year. He is a fat bastard who's views on "AM RADIO" have more holes in them than Swiss Cheese. If someone really wanted to take the time to do it, they could have an acurate rebuttle for anything he said in his radio show. No i havent listened to AM radio, no i wont ever listen. I's wipe my ass with my radio, before I wasted my time and money on his garbage.

There, makes more sense now...

 

[Tuffbucker]

I prefer my post exactly the way I wrote it.

TUFF

_________________________________________________
"The world would be better without liberals, tree hugging hippies, and John Kerry."

 

[BuzzH]

I like the edited version.

Wingnuts on the right...Wingnuts on the left...

 

[Calif. Hunter]

It is fine to enjoy Michael Moore for entertainment, if that's what you enjoy. But do not try to tell me that you believe it, if you claim an IQ over 50.

You can dislike or detest Bush, but do not try to tell me that his latest movie is anything but mental jello for those too lazy or stupid to mentally chew the meat of a subject.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Cali,

Which part of the movie did you disagree with??? Or are you just completely dismissing it, without seeing it?

Yes, it is skillfully made, but what do you expect from an Oscar winning Director?

Tuff,
You really ought to go see the movie, if you dislike Moore that much. In my opinion, at times, he takes on too many different directions in the movie, including shots at Daschle and at the News Media.

To dismiss him out of hand, is to shut your self out of the complete democratic process.

 

[Calif. Hunter]

EG: To dismiss him out of hand, is to shut your self out of the complete democratic process


LMAO! Michael Moore??? This was a joke, right? By dismissing him, I am shutting myselfout of the democratic process? Really?


Did you bother to read any of Nemont's post? Doyou question any of the drivel Moore spouts? I think you do.

 

[Hangar18]

What's your take on what Christopher Hitchens had to say about the movie?

I will not see it, period. One cent of mine toward that poster child for Big Macs is too much. What is the over/under on the date of the explosion?

http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/

 

[Calif. Hunter]

Mr.Hitchens is much more eloquent than I am, and here are just a couple of quotes. (If you are intellectually honest, you will read the article linked above by Hangar 18.)

Fahrenheit 9/11 is a sinister exercise in moral frivolity, crudely disguised as an exercise in seriousness. It is also a spectacle of abject political cowardice masking itself as a demonstration of "dissenting" bravery.

or

It must be evident to anyone, despite the rapid-fire way in which Moore's direction eases the audience hastily past the contradictions, that these discrepant scatter shots do not cohere at any point. Either the Saudis run U.S. policy (through family ties or overwhelming economic interest), or they do not. As allies and patrons of the Taliban regime, they either opposed Bush's removal of it, or they did not. (They opposed the removal, all right: They wouldn't even let Tony Blair land his own plane on their soil at the time of the operation.) Either we sent too many troops, or were wrong to send any at all—the latter was Moore's view as late as 2002—or we sent too few.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Hey Hangar,

In the interest of supporting Higher Education in Idaho, I'll fund you the $6 for the Matinee out at Edwards. That way you won't have to worry about your money funding Moore, and then you will be able to have a discussion about something you have seen. You'll have to cover your own Popcorn and Junior Mints. Cali, if you need $6 too, I got you covered.

If you actually believe the movie is a bunch of lies, then you should go see it, and confirm your guesses.

Cali,
I don't think Mr. Hitchens is more eleoquent than you, as his commentary was even more scattered and less coherent than the movie is. Yes, Michael Moore is a bit scattered, but nowhere as bad as Hitchens. And to paraphrase yourself, "if you are intellectually honest, you will" view Farenheit 9/11.

Based on the comments I heard in the lobby, people who did not know of Moore were going to see the movie, and they were leaving with definite opinions on Dubya's duplicity. As such, it is and will be an influencer in this year's process, and as such, is part of the democratic process.

 

[DRAFTSTUD]

Gunner, Buzz You may let the media both TV and Hollywood guide your votes, but both of you come off as Pissed-off liberals. Gunner my vote in 2000 was'nt a mistake and it is one I will repeat this year. Mr. Moore is out for nothing but Mr. Moore. If you want to be his cheerleader, fine, but it does dimminish any credibility you might have had to sway votes. GO BUSH!

 

[Bambistew]

I'm waiting for the "John Kerry" version to come out...

Maybe Rush can splice some footage together, that is if he can find his pills!

 

[JoseCuervo]

Draftstud,
How can you know what Mr. Moore's intentions were, unless you see his movie? Do you just rely on the Media to report what his intentions are, and allow them to form your opinions?

I would actually hope that Mr. Moore is out for Mr. Moore, as that is called Free Enterprise, and that is what has founded this nation. It is the Governmental meddling in Free Enterprise by Dubya/Jeb/Eisner that is the bigger concern of all freedom loving Americans.

Bambi,
It is funny how people dismiss Moore because Rush told them to...

 

[Hangar18]

EG,
$6 plus gas out and back to Edwards, plus 2 hours of my time not including drive time, not to mention the junk food while at the theatre. Haven't you been reading about the pollution in the valley because of too many single passenger vehicle trips? In the best interests of Moore's health, (and yours and mine) I'll stick to places that I can bike to and then skip the snacks. Going to the Flicks is simply an investment of 3 hours that I'll never get back. I think I can get more out of 3 hours picking up dog crap and pulling weeds.

Higher education? While the sun may actually never shine on a dog's ass, a stopped clock is still right twice a day.

I'll watch it when it hits HBO just like Bowling for Columbine, which was never.

 

[DRAFTSTUD]

Gunner, Moore made no qualms about what his intentions were, he stated them long before this trash flick came out, He was out to get Bush out of office. Pretty simple choice, go and see what I know that I will see, the ranting of idiots before a camera. I don'nt listen to Rush or any other "Political Genius". I do read and listen to people who have thoughts that can be blended by discussion with mine, that is what a Debate is, the sharing of Ideas, taking the fact and throwing out the fiction. But your betting the farm on a movis with only one purpose. I also have to ask myself, who could or who would I have asked to shoulder the things that Bush has had to shoulder, Gore? He has to stick his finger up his butt and yell "snake" just to pee!