granth
Roadie
Well A Young Man...
Posts: 516
|
Post by granth on Jul 10, 2004 18:51:14 GMT
The press has discovered the WGFA spat: www.examiner.ie/breaking/2004/07/10/story156387.htmlTownshend fuming over Fahrenheit row Rock legend Pete Townshend has launched a scathing attack at film-maker Michael Moore, saying he has been "bullied and slurred" by the director. Last year, the Stupid White Men author Moore approached the The Who guitarist to ask the star permission to use his song Won't Get Fooed Again in his controversial documentary Fahrenheit 9/11, which criticises George Bush's administration. Townshend refused to let the Oscar-winning director use the song, because the rocker didn't enjoy Moore's previous films Bowling for Columbine and Roger and Me. Townshend fumes: "Michael Moore has been making some claims, using my name, which distort the truth. "I greatly resent being bullied and slurred by him just because he didn't get what we wanted from me. It seems to me that this aspect of his nature is not unlike that of the powerful and willful man at the centre of his documentary. "He says that I refused to allow him to use my song Won't Get Fooled Again in his latest film because I support the war. I have never hidden the fact that at the beginning of the war in Iraq, I was a supporter. But now I am less sure we did the right thing. "I had not really been convinced by Bowling For Columbine and had been worried about its accuracy. To me, it felt like a bullying film. Once I had an idea what Fahrenheit 9/11 was about, I was 90 per cent certain my song was not right for them and pointed out that Won't Get Fooled Again is not an unconditionally anti-war song." It sounds as if the press left out some important points from the diary that Pete wrote. |
|
|
|
Post by Patty on Jul 14, 2004 5:13:00 GMT
www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/7/13/201741.shtml Tuesday, July 13, 2004 8:15 p.m. EDT Guitarist Peter Townshend Stands Up to Moore's Bullying Who guitarist Peter Townshend is ticked off with Michael Moore – and he's hitting back. Townshend used his Web site to strike back at Moore. Story Continues Below The rocker writes of Moore: "He says — among other things — that I refused to allow him to use my song 'Won't Get Fooled Again' in ['Fahrenheit 9/11'] because I support the war, and that at the last minute I recanted but he turned me down." Moore has claimed that he wanted to use the Who song at the end of his film after Bush's last line in the pseudo-documentary. Moore blames Townshend for vetoing the use of the song because he is "not a fan of Michael Moore's and in fact supports the war and supports Tony Blair and doesn't want the song used in any way that would make Blair look bad." While Townshend admits he did support the war he is less than certain about it today. Townshend said that at first the song rights had nothing to do with the film. He had never heard of it. But his agent said Moore had offered too little money. Rebuffed, Moore dragged in Miramax honcho Harvey Weinstein to intervene. At that point Townshend had second thoughts about Moore altogether. He didn't like his "Bowling for Columbine," which Townshend said was "a bullying film." Now Townshend is the target of Michael Moore's bullying. Townshend said he had been "slurred" by Moore because "he didn't get what he wanted from me. It seems to me that this aspect of his nature is not unlike that of the powerful and willful man at the center of his new documentary." Townshend concluded, "But he'll have to work very, very hard to convince me that a man with a camera is going to change the world more effectively than a man with a guitar." Editor's note:
|
|
|
|
Post by wholigan6404 on Jul 14, 2004 5:27:44 GMT
pete townshend is the new hero of the conservatives in America, he will speak at the Republican Convention next, and I bend towards conservatives and republicans and will vote for GW Bush
|
|
stef
Loves that CSI tune
Posts: 135
|
Post by stef on Jul 14, 2004 12:18:20 GMT
Quote Patty, quote paper, quoting Pete.... etc
<<<
Townshend concluded, "But he'll have to work very, very hard to convince me that a man with a camera is going to change the world more effectively than a man with a guitar."
>>>
Vote now for : Abbie Hoffman agrees or disagrees ?
|
|
|
|
Post by Ineedanewname on Jul 14, 2004 17:48:55 GMT
That's the single point of Pete's response that I disagree with. It's a very naive 1967 wishful-dreamy attitude. History has shown that men with guitars are most defintely in the minority when it comes to changing the world, whilst many times photo-journalists and news camera crews have brought us images which truly have set in motion the wheels of change. Think on it. When was the last time a man with a guitar made a difference to world, not a difference in music, but the world. |
|
kc
Fan
Posts: 155
|
Post by kc on Jul 14, 2004 18:05:51 GMT
That's the single point of Pete's response that I disagree with. It's a very naive 1967 wishful-dreamy attitude. History has shown that men with guitars are most defintely in the minority when it comes to changing the world, whilst many times photo-journalists and news camera crews have brought us images which truly have set in motion the wheels of change. Think on it. When was the last time a man with a guitar made a difference to world, not a difference in music, but the world.bob geldof, live aid 1985. |
|
|
|
Post by Patty on Jul 14, 2004 18:42:31 GMT
pete townshend is the new hero of the conservatives in America, he will speak at the Republican Convention next, and I bend towards conservatives and republicans and will vote for GW Bush Not at all. Maybe he is caught behind a rock and a hard stone. Eddie Vedder references Michael Moore in the Pearl Jam Live in Chicago, I believe, and mentions Moore's "activism" and encourages his young audience to meet at UIC Pavillion where Moore is having some type of rally a couple years ago. I know Eddie and Pete are friends so as far as politic's are concerned Pete is neutral. He is not American. Makes money here and has picked up quite a vast audience so I guess he as other musicians have to please the crowd to a certain extent and with that being said he is taking a neutral stand. Probably did get pressure from Vedder & Moore, etc.... |
|
|
|
Post by Mongolom on Jul 14, 2004 23:36:16 GMT
Round 2 starts right now - from mtv.com :
|
|
|
|
Post by Ineedanewname on Jul 14, 2004 23:59:06 GMT
bob geldof, live aid 1985. I knew someone would bring that up. Firstly, it doesn't count because it wasn't Geldof and his guitar that made the difference. Secondly, if it were to count, it would be the single truly exceptional example. Thirdly, as we're now all aware, it didn't make a difference in the end anyway. Very little changed for those who were supposed to benefit. And finally, what spurred Geldof into kickstarting Live Aid? News footage of the Ethiopian famine. That's right, a man with a camera. |
|
|
|
Post by Ineedanewname on Jul 15, 2004 0:10:47 GMT
Round 2 starts right now - from mtv.com : "Last year," he said in the statement, "the Who asked me to do a documentary on their career. I was sorry I had to tell them that due to my need to finish 'Fahrenheit 9/11' I would not be able to make their film for them. That's very strange indeed. Why would The Who have asked Moore to make a documentary about them when Townshend didn't even like Moore's previous films? I could be wrong, but this sounds like Moore guilding the lily once again. If that's so, the best thing he can now do is quit bitching before he digs himself any deeper into the hole. |
|
granth
Roadie
Well A Young Man...
Posts: 516
|
Post by granth on Jul 15, 2004 0:27:17 GMT
That's very strange indeed. Why would The Who have asked Moore to make a documentary about them when Townshend didn't even like Moore's previous films? I could be wrong, but this sounds like Moore guilding the lily once again. If that's so, the best thing he can now do is quit bitching before he digs himself any deeper into the hole. I really doubt the the who would even ask for ANOTHER documentary! They've already got a great one and I don't think they'd ever dream of asking moore if they wanted another. Also notice the sucking up at the end... |
|
|
|
Post by BillyBill on Jul 15, 2004 0:51:20 GMT
That's the single point of Pete's response that I disagree with. It's a very naive 1967 wishful-dreamy attitude. History has shown that men with guitars are most defintely in the minority when it comes to changing the world, whilst many times photo-journalists and news camera crews have brought us images which truly have set in motion the wheels of change. Think on it. When was the last time a man with a guitar made a difference to world, not a difference in music, but the world.I may have interpreted it wrong, but I thought what Pete was getting at with that statement was: a man with a guitar can't change the world, and a man with a camera can't do any better. could be wrong though |
|
kc
Fan
Posts: 155
|
Post by kc on Jul 15, 2004 1:10:34 GMT
You posed a question and I answered. A valid answer in the sense that a musician made an effort that had a positive impact. I too disagree with Pete's assessment that the guitar (or perhaps he used the term guitar as a metaphor for musician) is mightier than the camera. But your observation that " it didn't make a difference in the end anyway. Very little changed for those who were supposed to benefit" is based on what? That famine continues in much of the world? Wasn't there some measure of relief for those afflicted at the time? Was Live Aid meant to be an end-all to the problem of famine? Should no one have made an effort to help?? I think Bob Geldof did a very noble thing. kc I knew someone would bring that up. Firstly, it doesn't count because it wasn't Geldof and his guitar that made the difference. Secondly, if it were to count, it would be the single truly exceptional example. Thirdly, as we're now all aware, it didn't make a difference in the end anyway. Very little changed for those who were supposed to benefit. And finally, what spurred Geldof into kickstarting Live Aid? News footage of the Ethiopian famine. That's right, a man with a camera. |
|
|
|
Post by Ineedanewname on Jul 15, 2004 4:15:35 GMT
You posed a question and I answered. A valid answer in the sense that a musician made an effort that had a positive impact. I. But your observation that " it didn't make a difference in the end anyway. Very little changed for those who were supposed to benefit" is based on what? TEXTIt's based on the fact that vast sums of the 'Live Aid' donations ended up in the Bank accounts of Ethiopian officials, and shiploads of aid materials and food were left to rot on the docksides. Surpisingly enough, that's what happens when out of the goodness of your heart you give a few billion quid to an underdeveloped country, torn apart by civil war for decades, and run by a corrupt Government. |
|
|
|
Post by Ineedanewname on Jul 15, 2004 4:17:17 GMT
I may have interpreted it wrong, but I thought what Pete was getting at with that statement was: a man with a guitar can't change the world, and a man with a camera can't do any better. could be wrong though "But he'll have to work very, very hard to convince me that a man with a camera is going to change the world more effectively than a man with a guitar." Looks to me as if he's plainly saying "the guitar is mightier than the camera". |
|
|
|
Post by BillyBill on Jul 15, 2004 6:09:44 GMT
looks to me as if he could be saying either one
mainly because I seem to recall him saying things in the past about how you can't change the world with a guitar...but I may have made that up
|
|
|
|
Post by whoareyou on Jul 16, 2004 21:50:20 GMT
|
|
granth
Roadie
Well A Young Man...
Posts: 516
|
Post by granth on Jul 16, 2004 23:16:06 GMT
yeh- I saw that there- that stupid statement by moore just sickens me. I thought he was an alright guy, but he's just lying his way around everything. |
|
kc
Fan
Posts: 155
|
Post by kc on Jul 19, 2004 19:18:24 GMT
I just noticed that Pete has removed the "Moore" diary entry. Perhaps he's had enough about this issue.
kc
|
|
|
|
Post by texcolette on Jul 20, 2004 14:10:07 GMT
I used to like Michael Moore until he goaded Ralph Nader into running for president in 2000, splitting the bill just enough to hurt Gore. Of course, we all know Gore really won, and Shrub Bush's presidency is the frightening result of a travesty played out in the polls.
Eh, don't get me started. It ain't easy being a liberal in Texas.
As for Townshend, I don't give two s***s that he didn't want WGFA in Fahrenheit 9/11. Leave him alone, for f***'s sake. Don't nit-pick every little thing.
|
|
