HuskyCaucasian Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Y2HH Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 (edited) I have a hard time taking Michael Moore seriously as I've seen the kind of tricks he employs in his movies -- leaving out critical words or scenes which completely change the context of the conversation he had, or in the things said. This wouldn't be so bad, but he calls them documentaries, which to me is like calling a fictitious book non-fiction. If you watch for entertainment, not a bad thing, but if you take his word as uncontested fact (which I notice a LOT of people do), than seriously...let's just agree to disagree. Edited August 26, 2009 by Y2HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 I saw Cindy Sheenan was back as well. I guess she isn't lead copy now that she is protesting Obama. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 03:19 PM) I saw Cindy Sheenan was back as well. I guess she isn't lead copy now that she is protesting Obama. Cindy Sheehan got into the news at a time when I was the most pissed off at Bush and I was on her side at first, but after a while she got embarrassing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DukeNukeEm Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 (edited) He's very good a making movies. Edited August 26, 2009 by DukeNukeEm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 QUOTE (lostfan @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 03:41 PM) Cindy Sheehan got into the news at a time when I was the most pissed off at Bush and I was on her side at first, but after a while she got embarrassing. She got full of herself and went whackjob pretty quickly IMO. She's been roundly ignored and marginalized for quite a while. Couple years or so I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 06:32 PM) She got full of herself and went whackjob pretty quickly IMO. She's been roundly ignored and marginalized for quite a while. Couple years or so I think. Pretty much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted August 26, 2009 Share Posted August 26, 2009 QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 05:32 PM) She got full of herself and went whackjob pretty quickly IMO. She's been roundly ignored and marginalized for quite a while. Couple years or so I think. Yea, because the Democrats have power, she has no purpose anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted August 27, 2009 Share Posted August 27, 2009 QUOTE (kapkomet @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 06:48 PM) Yea, because the Democrats have power, she has no purpose anymore. She lost her relevance in 2004 IIRC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 Huffington Post's reviewer gave it a pretty decent savaging. More so than any of his recent projects, Michael Moore the messenger is fatally undone by Michael Moore the showman. Time and time again we cut away from worthwhile factual analysis or a compelling anecdote in order to let Michael Moore have a moment in the spotlight. More so than in any of his recent projects, Michael Moore chooses to undercut the brutal effect of simply stating the facts in order to toss out a lengthy side story that attempts to pull heartstrings yet falters under objective analysis. For the first time that I can remember, a Michael Moore documentary/propaganda piece is less about the subject at hand and more about Michael Moore himself. Some plot - The film purports to be a cliff-notes version of the financial scandal/stock-market meltdown that crippled the economy in September 2008. Hitting all the usual stops along the way (Regan's deregulation of business, the complete destruction of the manufacturing industry, Bush Jr's cozy relationship with fear, etc), Moore attempts to form a deconstruction of the myth of the practical and moral superiority of the economic mode known as capitalism. Along the way, we of course are invited to share in the pain and suffering of ordinary Americans who have been caught in the economic downturn that is not of their own making. And we are again treated to the occasional Michael Moore stunt, but these gimmicks are both useless and counterproductive and serve to take away from the narrative and reveal the director as a self-indulgent entertainer first and a social crusader second. Most problematic is not so much his preaching to the converted, but his narrative choices that render the film downright confusing to someone who already doesn't know what he's talking about. What's a sub-prime loan? You won't find out in any detail in the film, only that they are really evil. What exactly did Ronald Regan do in order to bring about the eventual decline of the American middle class? I couldn't tell you just from the film itself. The film scores some of its best points detailing the abysmal wages of airline pilots, yet makes no specific mention of Regan's deregulation of the airline industry or his firing of striking air-traffic control workers in 1981. Michael Moore's films have always worked best as a jumping-off point for liberal and progressive politics, so it can't be expecting to be the Shoah of anti-capitalistic screeds. But this one is so hell-bent on demonizing the somewhat demonic politicians and businessmen that it neglects to mention just what they did in the first place. This refusal to deal with the nitty-gritty also extends to his portraits of victimhood. As with most Moore projects, we see various vignettes of tragedy affecting the working class of America. While these stories are meant to pull at heartstrings, it's tough not to notice how carefully Moore avoids explaining how each family got into their current foreclosure nightmare. This is doubly foolish, as it allows critics like me to wonder how much blame they share while also neglecting a crucial opportunity to expose theoretically criminal lending practices that are as much to blame as the dreaded sub-prime mortgage. The filmmaker spends a good 10-15 minutes on the ghoulish practice of companies who take out life-insurance policies on their own employees. Yes it's morally icky and a troubling symptom of corporate culture, but 'dead peasant' policies are not illegal and don't really play a direct role in the financial mess that the film attempts to sort out. Yet it remains a token chunk of the film so Moore can have scenes of mourning family members cursing those no-good bureaucrats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 I just saw an interview where Moore questioned some of the Great Leader's decisions. He must be reprimanded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 QUOTE (mr_genius @ Sep 24, 2009 -> 06:40 PM) I just saw an interview where Moore questioned some of the Great Leader's decisions. He must be reprimanded. Believe it or not, liberals are pissed at Obama for not being liberal enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 QUOTE (lostfan @ Sep 24, 2009 -> 05:42 PM) Believe it or not, liberals are pissed at Obama for not being liberal enough. Blasphemy. Questioning Obamacus gives aid and comfort to the terrorists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 QUOTE (mr_genius @ Sep 24, 2009 -> 05:44 PM) Blasphemy. Questioning Obamacus gives aid and comfort to the terrorists. Don't forget, he is also a racist now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 QUOTE (kapkomet @ Aug 26, 2009 -> 05:48 PM) Yea, because the Democrats have power, she has no purpose anymore. Exactly. And in the everyone does it, Republicans are looking for their version As for his films, I have no desire to watch current propaganda, not even for entertainment sake. Now I love some of the old cold war stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 QUOTE (Tex @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 08:41 AM) Exactly. And in the everyone does it, Republicans are looking for their version As for his films, I have no desire to watch current propaganda, not even for entertainment sake. Now I love some of the old cold war stuff. GOP has it. His name is Glenn Beck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 QUOTE (kapkomet @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 12:05 PM) GOP has it. His name is Glenn Beck. I thought he was a journalist with some career credentials. I'm thinking they are looking for a Joe the Plumber. I'm thinking some retiree who was screwed over my medicare or the VA. Perhaps from Obama's district. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 QUOTE (Tex @ Sep 25, 2009 -> 12:07 PM) I thought he was a journalist with some career credentials. I'm thinking they are looking for a Joe the Plumber. I'm thinking some retiree who was screwed over my medicare or the VA. Perhaps from Obama's district. I see what you mean. Well, hell, most anyone that's dealt with the VA has been screwed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts