Brian Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 I usually see Moore's movies because the way he presents them are entertaining. I don't believe/agree with everything, but if even 10% of his stuff is accurate, it is scary. Thinking of seeing his new one this afternoon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 I plan on checking it out on Sunday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 everything I've read seems to say that I'm better off just watching the Frontline episodes on the meltdown. Probably equally interesting and you'll know a lot more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted October 7, 2009 Author Share Posted October 7, 2009 Not sure what to think about it. I guess it is depressing. Crazy what some of the corporations do to make money. Like taking out insurance policies on sick employees and when they die, collect on it and not give their families a penny. The whole fiasco last year with Congress voting on the bailout happened so fast and the part where they explain what happened was interesting. I'd recommend it to anyone who has an opinion on this stuff, whether you agree or don't with Moore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 QUOTE (Brian @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 03:55 PM) Not sure what to think about it. I guess it is depressing. Crazy what some of the corporations do to make money. Like taking out insurance policies on sick employees and when they die, collect on it and not give their families a penny. The whole fiasco last year with Congress voting on the bailout happened so fast and the part where they explain what happened was interesting. I'd recommend it to anyone who has an opinion on this stuff, whether you agree or don't with Moore. Executives have policies taken out on them all the time. And it's up to the individual to take care of themselves on life insurance. In fact, most of the time, they have private life insurance given to them as a part of their package (aka it goes to their families). There's nothing wrong with that because it's an investment in the company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrangeSox Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 Yeah, they're just investing a company asset. It costs them money if they lose a senior employee with decades of experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 I'd be curious how much of the proceeds of this movie that Moore is donating to help people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 04:32 PM) I'd be curious how much of the proceeds of this movie that Moore is donating to help people? How much of "Sicko" went to help people without insurance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 04:32 PM) I'd be curious how much of the proceeds of this movie that Moore is donating to help people? What does that have to do with anything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted October 7, 2009 Author Share Posted October 7, 2009 QUOTE (kapkomet @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 04:16 PM) Executives have policies taken out on them all the time. And it's up to the individual to take care of themselves on life insurance. In fact, most of the time, they have private life insurance given to them as a part of their package (aka it goes to their families). There's nothing wrong with that because it's an investment in the company. I didn't know companies did that. The families in the movie knew nothing about it until they got a letter in the mail. One case was a company getting 5M after an employee died. Some of that should go to the family. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted October 7, 2009 Author Share Posted October 7, 2009 He also points to the Reagen administration as the beginning of all this. How we ignored middle and lower class and focused on upper class. Claims Wall Street started running the country back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 I've never watched one of his films and probably will not start now. My opinion would not change even if he donated a s*** load of money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 Moore was asked the Charity question by Hannity the other night. Yes, I'm posting a clip of a segment from "Hannity". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 Damn, I actually liked the interview. You're killing me Balta. Now I may have to go see the movie. Hannity liking even part of it, that changes my view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted October 7, 2009 Author Share Posted October 7, 2009 QUOTE (Tex @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 05:23 PM) I've never watched one of his films and probably will not start now. My opinion would not change even if he donated a s*** load of money If you like movies, you should at least watch "Roger & Me". No political biasness in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted October 7, 2009 Author Share Posted October 7, 2009 QUOTE (kapkomet @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 04:41 PM) How much of "Sicko" went to help people without insurance? I think I heard he paid off a couple of those people bills. Not too mention at the end of the movie he anonymously paid off the medical bill of the wife of the guy who owned the number 1 anti-Moore website at the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 04:42 PM) What does that have to do with anything? The guy is doing a movie about the evils of capitalism, and trying to get rich off of it. You don't see the irony there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 05:52 PM) The guy is doing a movie about the evils of capitalism, and trying to get rich off of it. You don't see the irony there? How is that different then a reporter doing a piece on corporate fraud? Should that reporter donate their salary to those who were defrauded? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 06:06 PM) How is that different then a reporter doing a piece on corporate fraud? Should that reporter donate their salary to those who were defrauded? Yeah, that is totally the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted October 7, 2009 Share Posted October 7, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 06:22 PM) Yeah, that is totally the same. As you can see from the video Balata posted he has admitted in many cases to help the people in his spotlighted films. Ultimately he's a film director shining light on issues he feels need exposure. Not sure why you would think that he should automatically work for free or donate his income. Shedding light on the topics in his films will be more of an impact than 1 man donating to charity anyway, which he is doing as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 06:56 PM) As you can see from the video Balata posted he has admitted in many cases to help the people in his spotlighted films. Ultimately he's a film director shining light on issues he feels need exposure. Not sure why you would think that he should automatically work for free or donate his income. Shedding light on the topics in his films will be more of an impact than 1 man donating to charity anyway, which he is doing as well. He's also pretty well fabricated and stretched the truth in most of his movies. I think you could call him Glenn Beck if it made you feel better, because they are pretty much cut from the same cloth. They have no problem making things up to suit their truth in the pursuit of the "truth". It doesn't surprise me that he could demonize people for doing something, and then turn around and do the same thing himself. It also doesn't surprise me that people who line up to defend that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 QUOTE (Brian @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 04:46 PM) I didn't know companies did that. The families in the movie knew nothing about it until they got a letter in the mail. One case was a company getting 5M after an employee died. Some of that should go to the family. They are typically called 'Key man' policies. The proceeds are used to recruit and/or train the person's replacement, because in the higher executive positions it is sometimes costly. Businesses of all sizes do it. I had one on me several years ago, as I was the backbone of a small operation, and if I suddenl;y died, it would have cost tyhe owner a bundle to have someone do my job until he could find a replacement. nothing wrong with it and no reason whatsoever that any of it go to the family. It was his responsibility to take care of his family, not the companies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 07:01 PM) It doesn't surprise me that he could demonize people for doing something, and then turn around and do the same thing himself. It also doesn't surprise me that people who line up to defend that. He lives in a capitalist society and made a film bashing the principle. Wouldn't that mean he is advocating getting rid of capitalism? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 07:13 PM) He lives in a capitalist society and made a film bashing the principle. Wouldn't that mean he is advocating getting rid of capitalism? And yet he got rich by utilizing those same capitalistic principles. Yeah, there isn't any hypocrisy there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 7, 2009 -> 07:15 PM) And yet he got rich by utilizing those same capitalistic principles. Yeah, there isn't any hypocrisy there. Apparently no one in our country is qualified to make a film criticizing capitalism since we are a capitalistic country. And I guess that also means a meat eater cannot make a documentary about factory farming, someone who doesn't own a car cannot make a film about cars, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts