[mixin visuals]

whats the deal with michael moore being such a hard ass? he has such a hard on for bush that its almost like he is infatuatied (spelling?) with him.

i love it that he is gonna have to chew on this.

i heard this is only one of several other documentaries that shows michael moore edits only what makes him appear credible.

anyone know what the others movies coming out are?

[dcolton]

Perfect

[Spheric Harlot]

So, in other words, this film does EXACTLY what you accuse MM of doing, except the flipside?

Way to go.

Oh, and what's with "can't take it"?
Have you seen Moore respond to this?

I suspect he'll be flattered, rather than annoyed or whatever you seem to hope will happen.

After all, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

-s*

[dcolton]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
So, in other words, this film does EXACTLY what you accuse MM of doing, except the flipside?

Way to go.

Oh, and what's with "can't take it"?
Have you seen Moore respond to this?

I suspect he'll be flattered, rather than annoyed or whatever you seem to hope will happen.

After all, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

-s*

Did you take the time to watch the video or are you just spouting off in your normal fashion?

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by dcolton:
Did you take the time to watch the video or are you just spouting off in your normal fashion?

In one sense, you'd got me: I hadn't watched the trailer.

Having seen the newer one just now, I would probably make exactly the same post, except feeling a little clearer that that actually *is* what Mr. Wilson is doing.

-s*

[angaq0k]

I can see a TV spinOff already:

Good News America: The Only Show About the Good Stuff!

That will be great for the self - esteem of a few people I know..



I hope they will show it in my country; I am curious to see it.

Thank you mixin visuals for bringing it up!

[mixin visuals]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
So, in other words, this film does EXACTLY what you accuse MM of doing, except the flipside?

Way to go.

Oh, and what's with "can't take it"?
Have you seen Moore respond to this?

I suspect he'll be flattered, rather than annoyed or whatever you seem to hope will happen.

After all, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

-s*

no, you are doing just what moore does by putting words into my mouth that were the furthest thing from my mind.

i am just saying that now somebody is going to show all the crap that moore purposely cuts out, leaving the people he is interviewing without being able to say anything

prime example: when his fat butt in F 9/11 is out interviewing senators or congressmen and is trying to get them to sign their childern up for the army (even though anybody with a brain knows NO parent can sign their kid up for the army anyways), but anyways, he asks the one guy and then cuts to something else, leaving the audience with just one conclusion the way he cut it. that they think there kids are too good for war.

when actually, after he cuts the guy says his brother has 2 kids in iraq right then

thats the way he is deceptive, and thats what i would love to see some little upcoming whipper-snapper put him in his place... Jenny Craig

[TheMosco]

Originally posted by dcolton:
Did you take the time to watch the video or are you just spouting off in your normal fashion?

Wait, you mean you didn't complain about F 9/11 before you saw it?

[york28]

So he's piggy-backing on Moore's recent popularity. I would take it a lot more seriously if it didn't do this so obviously.

I think the reason that Moore is so dangerous to some is that his ideas seem to resonate with a lot of people, more than was expected. He may be a sloppy journalist, one-sided smearer of details; I won't deny that because I don't know enough about him to say. But when a lot of people agree with what he says not because he says it but because it resonates with something they've been feeling for a while but been unable to verbalize, it scares the crap out of a lot of conservatives.

People didn't like Bowling for Columbine because they instantly believed what Michael Moore said. They liked it because he offered a plausible explaination for a serious national issue (violence, esp. in kids) that there had been no other decent explainations for. And the blame the media thing is not a decent explaination.

F 911 is working the same way socially.

As much as Moore might mis-represent things (I'm not saying he does, just that he may), he is 100% correct that the patriotic thing to do is question our leaders, and hold them responsible. At the same time, we should question the questioners, or at least their ideas, which I assume is what this film is going to do. I have not seen the trailer yet.

I see no easy solution to the ultimate issue, which is that everyone always spins things his or her own way.

[fiesta cat]

Originally posted by mixin visuals:
whats the deal with michael moore being such a hard ass?

If he didn't scream and rant and rave, nobody would care who he is, and very few people would see his movies, which means he couldn't afford to keep making movies, etc.

I liked Roger & Me, and I liked TV Nation (in other words the "old" Michael Moore stuff), but those weren't going to make him wealthy, or allow him to circulate in the inner circles of the Hollywood/political elite. Nothing wrong at all with him wanting to get rich, there are people making much more money in much worse ways.

That's why I don't understand when people get upset. He's producing entertainment and getting rich, big whoop. I think most people who watch his later works are pretty intelligent and know enough to not blindly believe everything he says, but he gets people to think at least, which is more than 95% of what makes it to the big screen does.

Hell, PBS and The Discovery Channel both had shows linking the Bush family and various Saudi families (including Bin Laden) and raised several issues related to said ties, to the war on terror, etc., well before anybody even heard about Farenheit 9/11. They did it in a much more calm, much more thorough, less sensalationistic way than he did.

Take a wild guess at which is going to make a lot of money, which is going to get a lot of viewers. I'd be willing to bet that 3-4 times as many people saw Moore's movie as saw the PBS/Discovery Channel shows that came before it.

Although I sound like it, I'm not a Michael Moore fanboy. I respect some of what he does and that he gets people to think, but as a person I have no respect for him - I saw him at a rally basically shout down somebody who didn't agree with him, and I felt like I was watching a little kid on a playground. The hysterical little six year old side of him will earn much more money than the side of him that used to engage in intelligent give-and-take.

[Gee-Man]

Originally posted by mixin visuals:
whats the deal with michael moore being such a hard ass? he has such a hard on for bush that its almost like he is infatuatied (spelling?) with him.

i love it that he is gonna have to chew on this.

i heard this is only one of several other documentaries that shows michael moore edits only what makes him appear credible.

ALL documentaries are edited to leave things out. That's how a documentary filmmaker gets his point across. There is no such thing as an "unedited documentary". Michael Moore's movies are edited to best show HIS point of view, and this new movie "Michael Moore Hates America" is also edited to show this filmmaker's point of view. It's the most obvious thing in the world - yet the trailer makes it seem like this filmmaker has made some kind of shocking discovery that documentaries are *gasp* edited! Stop the presses!

All docs, even the most innocent ones, have a point of view - people only get up in arms about that when it's related to politics. Take the highly-praised documentary "Standing in the Shadows of Motown". In that movie, the filmmakers spend most of the film playing up the contribution of the backup band musicians who played on the Motown hits of the 60s and 70s, and very little time on the contribution of the singers and pop stars who sang on those records. No one would argue that the Supremes were not central to their hits, but the movie doesn't focus on them because the filmmakers are trying to make a point about how the other musicians were overlooked and nearly forgotten. Does this fact mean that "Standing in the Shadows of Motown" is full of lies? Should Diana Ross sue them for "selective editing" of her part in the music?

I really don't get how some people get so upset about Michael Moore. He makes movies. He has very strong opinions in those movies. So what - his "hard on for Bush" is no different than people who have a hard on against abortion, or people who have a hard on against Kerry, or a hard on against Windows, or any topic or person that people tend to take strong stands for or against. He's no more dangerous than, say, Ann Coulter, or Bill O'Reilly, or Al Franken. There are just people with opinions, nothing more, nothing less.

[olePigeon]

Anyone else find it interesting that documentaries on the History channel always include Hitler in some way or another?

[CD Hanks]

Originally posted by fiesta cat:
If he didn't scream and rant and rave, nobody would care who he is, and very few people would see his movies, which means he couldn't afford to keep making movies, etc.

I liked Roger & Me, and I liked TV Nation (in other words the "old" Michael Moore stuff), but those weren't going to make him wealthy, or allow him to circulate in the inner circles of the Hollywood/political elite. Nothing wrong at all with him wanting to get rich, there are people making much more money in much worse ways.

That's why I don't understand when people get upset. He's producing entertainment and getting rich, big whoop. I think most people who watch his later works are pretty intelligent and know enough to not blindly believe everything he says, but he gets people to think at least, which is more than 95% of what makes it to the big screen does.

Hell, PBS and The Discovery Channel both had shows linking the Bush family and various Saudi families (including Bin Laden) and raised several issues related to said ties, to the war on terror, etc., well before anybody even heard about Farenheit 9/11. They did it in a much more calm, much more thorough, less sensalationistic way than he did.

Take a wild guess at which is going to make a lot of money, which is going to get a lot of viewers. I'd be willing to bet that 3-4 times as many people saw Moore's movie as saw the PBS/Discovery Channel shows that came before it.

Although I sound like it, I'm not a Michael Moore fanboy. I respect some of what he does and that he gets people to think, but as a person I have no respect for him - I saw him at a rally basically shout down somebody who didn't agree with him, and I felt like I was watching a little kid on a playground. The hysterical little six year old side of him will earn much more money than the side of him that used to engage in intelligent give-and-take.

"...you're a true american hero..."

(Sorry, I'll go flog myself now.)

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by CD Hanks:
"...you're a true american hero..."

(Sorry, I'll go flog myself now.)

Yeah, he must have missed the memo on free speech being unpatriotic and implicitly terroristic.

-s*

[CD Hanks]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
Yeah, he must have missed the memo on free speech being unpatriotic and implicitly terroristic.

-s*

When you really haven't any idea what another person is talking about, it's usually in the best of manners to stay quiet.

(You completely missed what I was referencing too. Yes, it's obscure to a MacNN'er. No, I didn't expect you, Spheric, to instantly have a gigantic uproarious fit of laughter as a result.)

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by CD Hanks:
When you really haven't any idea what another person is talking about, it's usually in the best of manners to stay quiet.

(You completely missed what I was referencing too. Yes, it's obscure to a MacNN'er. No, I didn't expect you, Spheric, to instantly have a gigantic uproarious fit of laughter as a result.)

Excuse my appalling lack of American cultural background.

(I admit it's tough not to instantly ridicule everyone around you for not being American, but life's a bitch.)

[CD Hanks]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
Excuse my appalling lack of American cultural background.

(I admit it's tough not to instantly ridicule everyone around you for not being American, but life's a bitch.)

I'm laughing at the fact you don't have the balls to simply say "Oh, I didn't get the joke." and be done with it.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by CD Hanks:
I'm laughing at the fact you don't have the balls to simply say "Oh, sorry, I didn't get the joke." and be done with it.

Have fun.

you *could* just have posted a reference link.

But by all means, don't let me infringe on your superiority complex...
been there, done that.

-s*

[CD Hanks]

Originally posted by Spheric Harlot:
Have fun.

you *could* just have posted a reference link.

But by all means, don't let me infringe on your superiority complex...
been there, done that.

-s*

My condolences on the lack of balls.

Congradulations derailing the thread.

The joke would have flown over your head. (It wasn't meant for you.)

VVV edit: I don't normally say this to a lot of people, but goddamn, you're a ****ing faggot. VVV

[Spheric Harlot]

'khanksbye.

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by olePigeon:
Anyone else find it interesting that documentaries on the History channel always include Hitler in some way or another?

Just about every American or Western Europian statistically has lost someone during WWII.... so Hitler did effect literally every life in their viewership market.

It's like if your local news channel only covered sh!tsville indiana. You wouldn't care because it had nothing to do with you.

But if it covered your hometown, and country... perhaps it would be worth watching.


Modern history was shaped by Hitler... may not like it, but that's the way it is. From the UN, to the middle east problems, to poverty in Africa. You can trace quite a few of these problems at least partly to WWII.

Hence the reason it's a 'world war'

[dcolton]

Originally posted by TheMosco:
Wait, you mean you didn't complain about F 9/11 before you saw it?

Nope. Good try though.

[Sven G]

Originally posted by york28:
But when a lot of people agree with what he says not because he says it but because it resonates with something they've been feeling for a while but been unable to verbalize, it scares the crap out of a lot of conservatives.

A good thing, also...

[chris v]

People-from-above photography is soooo last year.

[LoganCharles]

Michael Moore probably doesn't hate America or its institutions that have made him wealthy but he is a voice for those who do. He definately is not a true patriot in any sense and has more similarities to McCarthy than any liberal would care to admit.

[chris v]

Okay, I watched the trailer, and it looks like this guy has about the same modus operandi as Moore, which is:

1. Form opinion.
2. Create film to support said opinion.

It's a free country, today at least.

CV