Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Death of a PresidentFollow

#1 Sep 01 2006 at 5:14 AM Rating: Good
Link to the article on the BBC website

Quote:
Death of a President

The Republican Party in Texas has said it is "shocking" and "disturbing" that a TV drama is to depict the assassination of US President Bush.
Death of a President uses archive footage, actors and computer effects to portray the president being shot dead.

UK broadcaster Channel 4, who made the mock documentary, said it explored the effects of the War on Terror on the US.

But Gretchen Essell, a spokeswoman for the Republican Party of Texas, called for it not to be screened.

"I cannot support a video that would dramatise the assassination of our president, real or imagined," she told the Press Association news agency.

"The greater reality is that terrorism still exists in our world. It is obvious that the war on terror is not over.

"I find this shocking, I find it disturbing. I don't know if there are many people in America who would want to watch something like that."

The 90-minute film shows Mr Bush being targeted by a sniper during anti-war rally in Chicago in 2007.

He is confronted by a demonstration when he arrives in the city to deliver a speech to business leaders and is shot as he leaves the venue.

The ensuing investigation focuses on a Syrian-born man.

A White House spokesman said of the programme: "We are not going to comment because it does not dignify a response."

The drama will have its world premiere at next month's Toronto Film Festival before a screening on UK digital channel More4.

John Beyer of UK TV pressure group MediaWatch said the film was "irresponsible".

He said it could even trigger a real assassination attempt and told the Daily Mirror: "There's a lot of feeling against President Bush and this may well put ideas into people's heads."

Peter Dale, head of More4, described it as a "thought-provoking critique" of contemporary US society.

He said: "It's an extraordinarily gripping and powerful piece of work, a drama constructed like a documentary that looks back at the assassination of George Bush as the starting point for a very gripping detective story.

"It's a pointed political examination of what the War on Terror did to the American body politic.

"I'm sure that there will be people who will be upset by it but when you watch it you realise what a sophisticated piece of work it is.

"It's not sensationalist or simplistic but a very thought-provoking, powerful drama. I hope people will see that the intention behind it is good."


So a "pointed political examination", or just another case of sensational journalism trying to shock us into improving their ratings?

Hard to say without seeing it I know. But personally I find it hard to believe that their pointed political examination could not have been conducted without showing the murder of the head of state of one of our (UK's) closest allies. Surely some things are a little tasteless.
#2 Sep 01 2006 at 6:56 AM Rating: Decent
***
2,453 posts
Quote:
But Gretchen Essell, a spokeswoman for the Republican Party of Texas, called for it not to be screened.

"I cannot support a video that would dramatise the assassination of our president, real or imagined," she told the Press Association news agency.


Making money off of tourists coming to gawk at Dealey Plaza is quite proper though.
#3 Sep 01 2006 at 7:40 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Quote:
He said it could even trigger a real assassination attempt and told the Daily Mirror: "There's a lot of feeling against President Bush and this may well put ideas into people's heads."
If you're sitting at home with your sniper's rifle, wavering between assassinating the president and not assassinating the president, I'm not sure if this is going to be what tips you over.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#4REDACTED, Posted: Sep 01 2006 at 8:11 AM, Rating: Unrated, (Expand Post) shown outside of this country im sure it will be a big immediate hit with viewers. most of the rest of the world thinks we are the biggest problem with terrorism in the world today.
#5 Sep 01 2006 at 8:42 AM Rating: Good
I suppose that you have to hand it to More 4 though. They are getting some pretty decent advertising on the website of a rival television company.

It is all due to the unique way that the BBC is funded you know....

It does worry me though that they felt their message could only be delivered to their viewers by dressing it up in some sort of psuedo-prophetic drama. Why is it necassary for the President to be a portrayal of the actual current President. I suppose what I am saying is why do they think that it is necessary to shock us into watching their programmes. Surely if their artistic/political message is a valid one it will receive its own plaudits regardless. I think that it cheapens the art somewhat when they feel that they have to bash you around the head with it. Maybe just me though....[shrug]
#6 Sep 01 2006 at 11:12 AM Rating: Good
Why is it necassary for the President to be a portrayal of the actual current President. I suppose what I am saying is why do they think that it is necessary to shock us into watching their programmes.
--------------------------------------------

because the masses are basically stuipid. why do we stop and look at a traffic accident? why do we stare at a fire?

we love caos. as much as we strive to insulate ourselves from adversity, we crave caos. the challenge to our mental state. strife. death.

man has created the worst caos in this world. man prepetuates it. man even invents it where there is none (iraq). we crave caos. we look for it where it doesnt exist. we WANT to find it.

killing some annomous actor just wouldnt have the same impact. it wouldnt deliver the BANG the director is striving for amoung the masses. why do you think Mel Gibson chose the crucification of Christ, amoung the thousands of stories in the Bible delivering the same message, to show to the masses?

because we want the BANG. we want the CAOS. deliver anything else, and people will not look twice at it. just like they speed up after passing a traffic accident when they see it is only a fender bender and not some horrible catastrophy.

welcome to the human condition. we are our worst enemy.
#7 Sep 01 2006 at 1:02 PM Rating: Decent
We love CAOS?
Or do you mean CAOS

I know I'm an ******* for commenting on people's spelling on the enternetz but I can live with that.



Edited, Sep 1st 2006 at 2:07pm EDT by Natdatilgnome
#8 Sep 01 2006 at 1:03 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
It's not that - it's just such an easy target, in this instance.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#9 Sep 01 2006 at 1:11 PM Rating: Good
Ministry of Silly Cnuts
*****
19,524 posts
Aeropig

Before you fUck off and die. . .

BBC is funded by Bliar so is Supposed to be his mouthpiece. The fact that they scrapped Top Of The Pops makes it now technically legal to refuse to pay the fee and rabbit-punch the inspectors. Fact.

More4, however, is commercial and pretty crap, but does has a clever pun as a name (More4 | Mo'Fo' | geddit?)

If you were a true Brit like what I are, you'd watch BBC4 and edjamacate yourself about what kind of Breakfast Cereal Lord St John-Stevas eats.

Now you can fUck off and die.
____________________________
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
#10 Sep 02 2006 at 3:19 AM Rating: Good
Quote:
The fact that they scrapped Top Of The Pops makes it now technically legal to refuse to pay the fee and rabbit-punch the inspectors. Fact.


Ah it is a sad era in British Broadcasting. But hey of it means I can shirk off the bloody fee then I am all for it. Scrap more of our long running and well loved programmes I say. The thought of commiting ABH to the BBMafia inspectors is somehow making my Old Peculier fueled hangover finally lift.

Quote:
If you were a true Brit like what I are, you'd watch BBC4 and edjamacate yourself about what kind of Breakfast Cereal Lord St John-Stevas eats.


Wheatabix surely. they wouldn't still be aristocracy if they didn't have theirs. Thats something I didn't learn from the BBC.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 195 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (195)