Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Ruso

Michael Moore

Recommended Posts

I just finished watching Michael Moore's movie, Roger and Me. Personally, I did like it very much. Nevertheless, I remembered about the hatred many have towards him, considering him a threatening dissenter. Manipulative? Maybe, I do agree that some of his movies(ie Fahrenheit 911) are good examples of what it is to twist facts.

I, however, admire his determination to question the almighty government.

What do you think about him?

:ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


He has talent in the film industry. Especially in the editing room but he's still good at story telling.

Questioning the gov is fine, even encouraged, but to lie about it is not good at all. To illegally bribe votes is not good, to call Americans stupid to thousands fo French studnts is not good. I could go on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A great deal of my family is from the Flint area, where Roger n Me is a bout. My step mother was in the same high school as Micheal Moore over in Davison. According to my parents, even has a teenager, he has always been an over the top activist. I can tell you that Even Roger N Me is very factually inaccurate. The timelines don't add up, and what he didn't mention, although it dramatically decreased it's presence in the Flint Area, GM is still the Cities largest employer, hands down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps politicians do embelish facts but how many of them have released in infactual 'documentary' in nation wide theaters during an election year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael Moore did not invent the genre, and it was up to the viewer to interpret his findings as they wished. The President and his staff came out looking pretty bad in Fahrenheit 9/11, but still got reelected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Roger & Me" was brilliant, and I think his best. He started out with the genuine intention of just interviewing Roger Smith but, throughout the course of the movie, morphs into the obnoxious documentarian that we all know and love.

The best thing about Michael Moore is that he has stayed relatively humble through all of the fame, and still serves as a more radical voice for progressive causes and out working for social good.

If you get a chance, his Bravo series "The Awful Truth" is available on DVD (on Netflix). I loved the Alan Keyes in the mosh pit segment. Hilarious!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps politicians do embelish facts but how many of them have released in infactual 'documentary' in nation wide theaters during an election year?

Politions are supposed to be trusted, and no they don't release donumentaries containing their lies, they release official, and supposedly reliable, documents that contain their lies. They minipulate using their power and that, to me, is much worse.

As for Michael Moore, I like him, he may "twist" facts, but he probably is more truthful than many polititians. And my favorite movie of his is Roger and Me. Living in Lansing, I had always heard of GM pulling out of Lansing, just like it did Flint if we didn't give GM what it wanted, we feared becoming "another Flint." GM screwed Flint, badly, and if you have been to Flint, you can see the results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps politicians do embelish facts but how many of them have released in infactual 'documentary' in nation wide theaters during an election year?

they do. it's called "swift boat veterans for truth". it was an infactual 30 second commercial. very effective in hiring what might be viewed as the worst president in modern times. IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they do. it's called "swift boat veterans for truth". it was an infactual 30 second commercial. very effective in hiring what might be viewed as the worst president in modern times. IMO.

Cinco, that wasn't made by politicians. That was made by the Swift Vets and POWs for Truth organization. Bush had nothing to do with them and never endorsed their campaign even stating, "We have not and we will not question Senator Kerry's service in Vietnam." Finally, Bush requested all 527 group political advertisements be removed from the airwaves.

Also, how exactly did these 30 second (a far cry from a full length feature film in theaters) commercials 'hire' Bush?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was made by the Swift Vets and POWs for Truth organization. Bush had nothing to do with them and never endorsed their campaign even stating, "We have not and we will not question Senator Kerry's service in Vietnam." Finally, Bush requested all 527 group political advertisements be removed from the airwaves.

By the time the commercial was pulled, it had already made its (false) case. Bush didn't have to endorse it for it to be hurtful to Kerry's campaign. In fact, he effectively "had his cake and ate it too" by letting the commercials run for so long and then acting like he was bothered by them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is that it wasn't a campaign by a politician as Cinco claimed and I do not endorse their tactics (SVPFT) any more than I do Moore's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you guys see Bowling for Columbine? I didn't really care for it.

I really liked it. It was much better done than Fahrentheit(in my opinion) and dealt with a very cruel, and current topic.

:ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is that it wasn't a campaign by a politician as Cinco claimed and I do not endorse their tactics (SVPFT) any more than I do Moore's.

The difference is that the swiss boat ad was released explicitly to affect the campaign, and it was widely broadcast on national television, where it would reach and influence a wide variety of voters. Moore's films, on the other hand, are meant primarily as entertainment. The fact that you had to make an effort to go to the theatre to see it has the effect of limiting the audience to certain demographics. I'd bet that 90% of the people who went to see "Fahrenheit 9/11" would never have voted for Bush anyway, so its impact on the election was much less than the swift boat ad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael Moore went dry after Candy died . . . best work I still have to admit was "Canadian Bacon" :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, that one was hilarious.

Boomer: The capital Toronto.

RCMP Officer at Headquarters: No, the capital of Canada is Ottawa.

Boomer: Yeah, right. Do we look that stupid? Ottawa!

Roy Boy: Nice try, Dudley.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the time the commercial was pulled, it had already made its (false) case. Bush didn't have to endorse it for it to be hurtful to Kerry's campaign. In fact, he effectively "had his cake and ate it too" by letting the commercials run for so long and then acting like he was bothered by them.

kerry was hurtful to his own campaign. he didnt stand for anything. people may not agree with bush but during his campaign he had a plan, kerry? no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

kerry was hurtful to his own campaign. he didnt stand for anything. people may not agree with bush but during his campaign he had a plan, kerry? no.

Kerry's major failing is on the Iraq war issue. By standing for both war and peace, he was trying to play both sides of the issue. But Bush had no issues to call his own beyond Iraq. He sided with the majority of Americans on arbitrary social issues and sidestepped economic questions. It wasn't a very spectacular campaign.

Were Bush not working the "Forrest Gump" image (the likable idiot) to Kerry's boring "school prinicpal" image, it would have been even closer than it was, and Kerry would have likely won.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kerry's major failing is on the Iraq war issue. By standing for both war and peace, he was trying to play both sides of the issue. But Bush had no issues to call his own beyond Iraq. He sided with the majority of Americans on arbitrary social issues and sidestepped economic questions. It wasn't a very spectacular campaign.

Were Bush not working the "Forrest Gump" image (the likable idiot) to Kerry's boring "school prinicpal" image, it would have been even closer than it was, and Kerry would have likely won.

i agree... or i'm just trying to increase my postcount. you pick :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I saw the two condidates, I knew that George W Bush would win. It would not have mattered what Kerry said or what was put forward by either champaign. Since the champaign between Kennedy and Nixon, the candidate that knew how to use the cameras best and and showed the best on TV has won. What they stand for or what they say really hasn't mattered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.