Michael Moore

I can't believe this joker. I could care less about his politics and I understand he has a book or movie he wants to plug but his comments are so totally off base that I truly hope everyone shows their disapproval by not buying the book or seeing the movie.

In case you didn't hear what he said here it is. I am paraphrasing here but you'll get the point. He stated that all of the people who support our war in Iraq deserve to have their sons or daughters killed over there! that scumbag, I wish someone would shove a scud missile up his A$$. Jerk. Thing is those sons and daughters who are risking their lives are doing so so that losers like him can spout all of their BS.

Please do not support this guy, he's not deserving of any respect. People like him make me sick.

Chris

I agree, he DEFINITELY goes overboard. However I did have to see his film for a class, and it wasn't as bad as you might think. I understand your point, but also he does have one of his own. I didn't agree with everything in the movie, but I do think he raises some good issues to think about.

I don't know much else about the man except that there was quite a fuss over his appearance on the movie awards or something. I don't think what he did was in good taste, and I do think he is quite set in his ways and most likely in poor judgement in some areas.

But I must advocate that there is still such a thing as freedom of speech, so he technically is allowed his voice. Even protestors of the war are allowed to speak up. I just am hoping you're not one of the people that tells protestors in general to "sit down and shut up," since I've met some people like that and it annoys me a great deal. But I do agree that Michael Moore tends not to voice his opinion(s) in a very nice way, which upsets a lot of people. To tell you the truth I'm not a big fan of the guy myself.

I'm rather looking forward to this movie...



A trailer for the film can be seen here.

Turtlemaniac,
I see your point but there are some things that are way beyond just being controversial. He crossed the line with that remark. Those soldiers don't get to choose if the fight or not. Blame the politicians not the troops.

Chris Marston

I used to be a big fan of him. TV nation while being a political crapfest, was one of the funniest shows EVER. I loved "roger and ME", I thought it was also hilarious, in that it showed the truth in such a dark-yet-funny way...
Until I found out that the Facts in Roger and Me were not really facts at all, just like the "facts" presented as "Facts" in columbine.

I STILL think he's funny, which REALLY pisses me off, because I find him to be disgustingly anti-american...

*EDITED OUT*

Actually, Michael Moore tells it like it isn't, which is where the problem lies.

I just got done reading Dude Where's My Country for the third time. It raises some very interesting facts.

Ah yes, those "facts" on pp xiii, 9, 15-16, 17-19, 20, 23, 43 (as well as pretty much the rest of Chapter 2), 53, 58, 67, 69, 74-75, 82, 110, 111-112, 160, 180... which are not actually facts.

Watch bowling for columbine as well... very good documentary that gets its point accross perfectly.

You mean the fictional piece, "Bowling for Columbine"? In this film. Moore relies heavily, on staged scenes, distortion of facts, outright lies, as well as some very creative editing.

That's the problem--I used to think that he was "teling it like it is." I then did some research, and I realized that he wasn't. In some instances, he fabricated things entirely, and portrayed them as fact, or compiled several snippets of fragments of facts, and portrayed them as one entire truth.

Bowling for columbine was disgusting, because it has SOME people actually thinking that this was the truth. Several instances I remember: He took parts of several speeches heston made, cut out ALL of his references to the columbine incident(where he acknowledged and remembered the victims), and switched it around, changing the meanings of his words. He then presented it as if it was all one speech, at one event.

He claims that the company makes "ballistic Missles" right there, next door. When in fact, they take old ballistic missle boosters, and convert them to launch sattelites. But since the company that did this ALSO made ballistic missles, he wasn't "lying" by saying that they made them, and that they were in the same town, insinuating that they "made them right there."

So many manipulating of the facts in order to attack certain people/cultures/etc.

I took a sociology class a few years back where they actually USED his movies as a TEACHING implement! They took a satirical docu-comedy, composed of erroneous, and some downright false information, and taught it as fact, in order to demonstrate the "evils" of capitalism, and how it leads to economic restructering, which is, according to this class THE ( as in the only ) cause for poverty, homelessness, cultural/economic decay& crime. Yup. GM pulling out of Flint michigan is the same process that has lead to ALL POVERTY in the US. Evil Capitalist company pulls out of a community to compete in a global market--oh, wait, it's for profit, greed, not to stay in buisness, silly me! And that's T H E cause for poverty.

If someone stands AGAINST certain values and principles that I consider to be at the core of American culture, I will call them Anti-American. The Capitalistic nature of our free market and the right to keep and bear arms are two of those values, and Moore is consistently working against them.

*EDITED OUT*

http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html

This is an interesting site. I had always thought of everything Moore said in Bowling as fact too. However, this site makes some really eye-opening charges against his "facts." I haven't done my own real research yet, but I hope to soon.
I, too, took a class where I had to see this film. I am going to find as much information as I can and hopefully speak to my old professor about whether or not it ought to be used as a teaching implement.
Thanks for making me question what he said. I thought things smelled a little "fishy" from the way they were portrayed in the movie, but he condenses it all into such a short period of time that I didn't really give it a second thought. Now I want to find out for myself if I'm right or wrong to think that his "facts" may not be the truth at all.
What hit me from the movie was that Moore did seem to sort of just "spring" the interview on Heston. I am not condoning anything Heston may have said and/or done, but I'm saying that it just seemed strange how Moore kept bugging him after he had already said he didn't know about the girl's death, and that he no longer wished to speak to Moore.
Anyway, it's something to think about, especially now that I'm all done with my undergrad studies.