Will we actually get to see Loose Change in theaters?

As you may or may not know, Loose Change the final cut is scheduled to be in movie theaters by the end of the year ( according to loosechange911.com ). Does anyone know if this will be in all theaters or select ones? How important will this film be to the truth movement? What do you think the key topics of interest will be?

I think the second edition was a great film, but this one will be substantially different. I beleve they will focus only on key topics that are air tight to give debunkers little room for discrediting them. Alex Jones is producing the film and I've always had respect for his abilities in making great films.

I'm hoping this film will educate people on the subject and get them thinking if nothing else. Will this movie stir the pot?

I would love to see this film in the theaters, however the backing is limited and in the theater business, thats a key point in order to get theaters to show the film.

My guess is the theater wont show the film unless there is a national advertising program to promote it first. Theater owners will not give up a screen for a film that has no advertising regardless the subject matter.

So unless Alex Jones pays for trailers or gets a big production company like MGM or FOX to distribute it, I say it will never see the main stream.

To bad really, since this is the film that got me interested in the first place.

Well they must have something in mind for funding it, why else would they be making the movie? Why would Alex and the Loose Change crew be promoting this if it wasn't feasable?

Hopefully , NEVER .... it would be a disgrace to movie theaters everywhere. yes , even iran .

video.google.com...

I think this is the right one Loose Change 2nd edition.

I believe that the government is at fault for 9/11. That being said, it wont air in theaters because it would shame America. Simply put.

I disagree with most everything claims in loose change. But I really hope it makes it to theaters and gets a big marketing campaign. Because right now the scientific community doesn't really address 9/11 because it's not worth their time to try and argue against a group of people who will just make up anything they want to believe anything they want. But if it's forced into the public there will be a need for them to speak out so that the general public isn't mislead by the film. So I hope it breaks into the mainstream and becomes well known instead of the underground cult status it now has.

Only if they give all of the proceeds to the families of 9/11. Then they can show it whereever they please and it will still help those who lost a loved one that day.
Loose Change may be garbage in my eyes but damn is it marketable.

From what I have heard, the final cut will be almost totally different than the previous versions, I believe they are focusing on the points that are the hardest to debunk. These may include how the government lied about the deadly dust in the air after the events, and why there is still no reasonable explaination for the collapse of wtc7.



Thats what I'm hoping for. Even if people do not agree with the film, at least they will be able to see a side of the story that the major media outlets refuse to cover seriously.

Well they obviously have to pay for movie expenses so they can't give ALL of their money to the families, but this is an excellent idea as people will see the movie to help a good cause, no matter what their point of view.

But those are probably the easiest issues there are. The EPA kept info about the air quality to protect the local businesses. It was a judgment call. It could have been the wrong one, but had they not than most of the people in that area would be out of business and have to live out in the street. Either way it's a disaster and people would suffer. The ultimate cause being the hijackings.

And the WTC7 is not mysterious at all. Do you think they will actually interview the demolition experts and civil engineers who were there and could tell hours in advance that the building would most certainly collapse because it was abundantly obvious? Of course not.

Regardless of how they change it, one technique they always use will remain:

If it presents a conspiracy, use it. If it doesn't help present a conspiracy, cut it. Micheal Moore uses this technique too. Whatever it takes to lead the viewer into the conclusion you want, rather than letting them come to their own conclusion. Hide any information that will prevent them from coming to your own conclusion.

These same guys started a new website for architects and engineers who think 9/11 was an inside job. They list all the engineers and architects that are part of their organization and their degrees and lisc. Do you know what the requirement is for getting listed on the site? That you have a web browser. Go sign up on the site, enter any credentials you want, and press enter. Bam, you are listen as an accredited expert on their web site.

It's a big con. And even if these guys managed to hit a piece of truth, it would simply be coincidence.

It will play in select theaters.
It will contain less original footage than Blair Witch Project.
It cost less to produce.
I doubt it will make as much.
Many people thought Blair Witch Project was real.
Laughing really loud at the end will draw less stares of contempt.
More people will believe it to be real than Blair Witch Project.
People call me sheeple.
Calling an individual something that is plural makes little sense.
Never let facts get in the way of truth.


[edit on 30-5-2007 by Ahabstar]

Even if it does not make theaters.....it will show up on
~The Sundance Channel~
They are very cool, open minded and they show everything that doesn't get any regular play time, giving a break to all the 'little guys'......

It should be played before the movie starts instead of watching those lame ads before the previews and the movie start.

I don't think lying to the people about the conditions was the right thing to do. I also don't believe these people would become homeless from closing their buisnesses down for a few weeks. I would rather lose some money any day if it meant staying healthy.





Can you provide a link to this website?

IMO, Loose Change doesn't try to mislead or trick you into believing them, it merely presents a different point of view of the events. How is it a big con? They didn't know that when they made the first video that it would get so huge. They didn't ask for all the attention but i believe their intentions are good and they are doing their best job to be fair and honest.

Actually they started out to do a fictional movie about two guys researching 9/11 and found out it was all a giant conspiracy as a student project. During pre-production they decided to drop the fictional story angle and develop a documentary style movie based on their research. Avery doesn't mention anything about if they went in with objectivity or stuck with the predrawn conclusion that it was still a giant conspiracy.

If so, then Loose Change would be by definition a mockumentary. The style is so old that when Rob Reiner made "This Is Spinal Tap" (1984) about a made up band he called it a rockumentary. Mockumentaries are commonly used in comedy and drama (Blair Witch Project), they are extremely common in propaganda.

Yeah, unpopular view, but just stating facts, not commentary on content. Just facts.

Do you have any links or evidence that can support this statement? I'm curious to browse the information your looking at.

Should be a short film then



This is what gets me, the assumption by the 911 Cult that the sheeple who don't follow the cult are not thinking.

I do think honestly. I have looked at much of the "evidence" and I do not see what the cult claims.

When did i say that people who believe the official story are not thinking? I'm talking about the people who haven't actually done any research other than watching cnn and fox news. Many people have never thought to question the events and would never believe that their precious media outlets and politicans would ever lie to the people. Read a history book people.

It's misleading because they use selective quoting and intentionally leave out the most important information which prevents the user from making a decision. Not to different from the complaint you have with the EPA. They conveniently witheld information. Not to mention many of their version have had flat out lies. How is that being honest? How is it NOT a con? They didn't ask for all the attention? well for one thing, they don't have any attention. outside of the conspiracy groups, they are completely unknown. But they have been working hard on their marketing which shows they desperately want attention.

Say what you will, but one thing they most certainly are not doing is trying to be fair nad honest. They are the opposite of honest. It only seems honest if one wants to believe what they are saying is true.