EXCLUSIVE: '2016 Obama's America' Filmmaker Reacts To President's Slam; Looking For Network To Air Before Election; Says Mainstream Media Refusing Coverage - Deadline.com
| Tuesday September 11, 2012
’2016: Obama’s America’ Docu Slammed By President’s Campaign As “Lies”
... DINESH D’SOUZA: “I welcome Obama’s critique of the film. He has probably figured out that he cannot ignore it any longer. Obama’s response is a characteristic mix of name calling and false allegations. Some of the claims he makes refer to things that are not even in the film. Elsewhere Obama just gets it wrong. For example, he disputes that he funded $2 billion in Brazilian oil exploration. In reality, Obama has given billions of dollars not only to Brazil but also to Columbia and Mexico to drill for oil. On March 19, 2011, Obama gave a speech in Brazil in which he deplored the legacy of colonialism, promised technology and support for Brazilian energy development, and concluded “when you are ready to start selling we want to be one of your best customers”. The facts in the film stand up very well to the closest scrutiny. I think people should see 2016 and make up their own minds.
DEADLINE: What do you think of the criticism the film has received?
D’SOUZA: The criticism of the film actually bothers me less than the neglect of the film. If I were Michael Moore and I were to make a film that was the No. 2 political documentary of all time, I would be on every network. I would be onMeet The Press, and I would be profiled in The New York Times, and I would be all over MSNBC. Instead large sectors of the press are refusing to cover the film. They are just pretending it doesn’t exist.
D’SOUZA: The criticism of the film actually bothers me less than the neglect of the film. If I were Michael Moore and I were to make a film that was the No. 2 political documentary of all time, I would be on every network. I would be onMeet The Press, and I would be profiled in The New York Times, and I would be all over MSNBC. Instead large sectors of the press are refusing to cover the film. They are just pretending it doesn’t exist.
DEADLINE: What is your response to charges that you are simply an anti-Obama propagandist?
D’SOUZA: I tried very hard with this film to make an intelligent film with credible sources and new information. I’m a college president [D’Souza in 2010 was named the president of The King’s College, a Christian college located in New York City], I’ve been a fellow at the Hoover Institution and at the American Enterprise Institute, so what is kind of funny is in a guy like Michael Moore we have a true propagandist and a true conspiracy theorist. A guy who is fast and loose with the facts. My film was to some degree inspired by Fahrenheit 9/11. In the sense that I remember that Michael Moore dropped that film in the middle of the 2004 campaign and it had a big impact. But nevertheless, I set out to make very different type of film than Michael Moore. One that is, first of all, not just preaching to the converted. And second, one that doesn’t insult the intelligence of the audience. And I really think that is actually a large part also of the film’s appeal. That even though the left says it’s propaganda, it’s a risky attack on the film because when people go to see it, they actually see whether they agree or disagree that it is not propaganda. Whatever your politics, you are going to come away from this film saying at least, “Hey, I do know a whole bunch of things about Obama I didn’t know 90 minutes ago.”
D’SOUZA: I tried very hard with this film to make an intelligent film with credible sources and new information. I’m a college president [D’Souza in 2010 was named the president of The King’s College, a Christian college located in New York City], I’ve been a fellow at the Hoover Institution and at the American Enterprise Institute, so what is kind of funny is in a guy like Michael Moore we have a true propagandist and a true conspiracy theorist. A guy who is fast and loose with the facts. My film was to some degree inspired by Fahrenheit 9/11. In the sense that I remember that Michael Moore dropped that film in the middle of the 2004 campaign and it had a big impact. But nevertheless, I set out to make very different type of film than Michael Moore. One that is, first of all, not just preaching to the converted. And second, one that doesn’t insult the intelligence of the audience. And I really think that is actually a large part also of the film’s appeal. That even though the left says it’s propaganda, it’s a risky attack on the film because when people go to see it, they actually see whether they agree or disagree that it is not propaganda. Whatever your politics, you are going to come away from this film saying at least, “Hey, I do know a whole bunch of things about Obama I didn’t know 90 minutes ago.”
-go to link and go see "2016"-
No comments:
Post a Comment