MICHAEL MOORE.

[derek]

Michael Moore is to vote for Gen Wesley clark,a peacenik voteing for a General, what a country!!..

[crawjo]

Michael Moore is the idiot's thinking man. Or would that be the thinking man's idiot?

[frankiepop]

SO WHAT IS SO *STUPID* about Michael moore......................why am i an idiot????


dont say well, it's obvious


step up to the plate and tell us all what is goddamn stupid about moore....
put your opinion where your mouth is.................

i dunno why everybody here seems to hate every political jokester at jc...


i watched moore's documentaries i think that they are ...Clever.
well thought out. i dont think that they are the work of an idiot's man.

i think that they
are creative, , humorous, poignant, , a point of
view, challenging, regional, and the work of a smart man who talks to his audience
as if they are intelligent.

bowling for columbine is one of the better doc's recently ...
moore searches for answers while he debunked both liberal and conservative myths..

he shredded heston in an interview...exposing him for the shallow well he really is...

[Monte Smith]

I like to say that Michael Moore is all that is best about the humor section of your local bookstore. He's both a Big, Fat Idiot and a Stupid White Man. I pray to God he's out front campaigning for the general.

[tippy]

frankiepop, so he shredded an old man with Alzheimer's (who'd welcomed him into his private residence) at the end of an otherwise interesting film...that's hardly a defense.

[frankiepop]

a defense to what tippy...who has to defend........


crawjo says he represents the stupids so what is so stupid about moore
i just asked for a defense or justification to substantiate ..what is stupid...
now i gotta defend


see this is where those cant justify their....

and i dont know, but who said heston had alzheimers
at that time

and he didnt look alzheimered out standing in front of the
national rifle assoc members waving a rifle in the air just
months earlier stating 'outta my cold dead hands..'

what's wrong with putting the NRA's president and spokesman
feet to the fire. since he is old he gets a pass???? if he's too
old, then get out of the kitchen.

at least, moore has some substance & humor that he can
at least he gives some justification to what he says outside
of name calling........

I find it quite humorous that anyone still has the balls to call Bowling For Columbine a "documentary".

[frankiepop]

why not?

what would you call it?


what do you want to call it, dolan.

redefine and criticize it...where's your balls?

[willy]

He's a dimwit, the left's reality TV guy. He appeals to the MTV generation. The brainiacs who have no idea who Abe Lincoln was, but can recite every line from season five of Friends.

As for humor and politics I'd take Dennis Miller over Moore anyday.

[frankiepop]

oh strong justification to what is dim about moore....

still waiting...

i am just reeling and rocking in overwhelming criticism and detail

thank you willy

you did it again ..a wonderful display of vacant substance..

isnt it time to go find an editorial??

doc·u·men·ta·ry ( P ) Pronunciation Key (dky-mnt-r)
adj.

1. Consisting of, concerning, or based on documents.

2. Presenting facts objectively without editorializing or inserting fictional matter, as in a book or film.


Frankie, if you haven't seen all the breakdowns about how fictionalized this movie was, or if you haven't even heard Moore himself later say that his movie was meant to be a comedy more than a documentary then you are living under a rock with your eyes closed, and I can't help you.

I suppose you also think "reality" tv is totally unscripted?

[frankiepop]

well let's see

i thought the interviews in michigan seemed factual

i thought the interviews in colorado seemed factual.


i thought the fact that heston showed up after columbine and the
michigan murder seemed factual

i thought the search into canada and examining their gun laws and
murder rates seemed factual. the following the boys shooting up
columbine seemed factual...

youre making the accusations...why dont you point out what was so
wholly wrong and missing of fact.........

[Cem]

I'm not a fan of Michael Moore's. He pretty much lost my vote with the things he did after Roger & Me (which is his best work, imo). His treatment of Heston was deplorable (though, iirc, Charlie was pretty damn insensitive himself with his speech re: Columbine, for instance). Otoh, if he at least plants a nugget or two of wisdom in the mainstream media and tv-viewing public, he's doing some valuable work. We all know y'all need it down there...

[Brian Olewnick]

fpop, I believe what's being referred to (not having seen the film myself) is the portion involving the free firearm for opening a bank account, which was entirely fraudulent on Moore's part.

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



And here's the link for that Frankie. None of the links came out in the text that I posted, but you can go here and check them all out if you need to.

[tippy]

frankiepop, I liked "Bowling for Columbine" up until MM's rendez-vous with Heston and especially when Moore ended his film by placing a photo of the dead girl outside Heston's place--how macabre--as if her death were on Heston's shoulders--it just stank of a self-righteous hyperemotionalism that severely compromised what I thought was an otherwise provocative and entertaining film (and, for me, his credibility ever since). So I guess if I were going to score positive points for Moore, I would have avoided that whole scenario.

[Gordon B]

Moore on Kosovo

Read what Moore wrote in 1999 and then try to reconcile it with his support for Clark.

[frankiepop]

1. the horton shot is bullshit in your article. these are usual doc techniques
and moore and a factual account of how the horton story was pushed.

2. one goes through the columbine and nra rally. i think moore just demonstrates
how callous the nra was to arrive so soon after columbine. and how they ignore
and handle pleas from those who asked them not to come. certainly, it gets odd
when they show in michigan as well and heston denies knowing of the national
incident and further admits it was probably shouldnt have been done..


but after streaming through about half and i have to break now....my impression is a lot
of needless ink to wear out the reader....and whata buncha bullshit...but at least u give something........unlike the rest of the critics here, nice effort ...i will pick up on it later.. and maybe you do win here.

Frankie, I have deleted that enormous post. It was too long and didn't read well due to the fact that the links didn't show up.

Please use the link I provided for it. You will find that everything he says he fully backs up. It's only a buncha bullshit if you don't want to believe the facts that he gives to back up his claims. That would be unfortunate on your part seeing that you so readily believed Moore.

Entertaining movie or not, it was not a documentary.

[willy]

The left doesn't like to be bothered with something as mundane as the facts Scott.

[Jazzooo]

It seems pretty clear that the most outspoken critics of Moore here are those who like W and want himmto be president for another term. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

I don't care for everything Moore has done or said, but that's an unrealistic standard--I don't feel that way about anyone, not John Lennon, not my wife, not myself. I think we have to face facts: righties will make fun of Moore because he is a leftie.

[crawjo]

Michael Moore is a hypocritical, self-righteous buffoon. His insta-books are filled with inaccuracies; the numerous inaccuracies in his documentary (starting with the title of the freaking thing) have been endlessly chronicled. He sets himself up as a man of the people, yet lives in a swank apartment in uptown Manhattan, and it is usually the ordinary folks that he makes the most fun of in his films. In other words, he has a talent for making secretaries, pr guys, and other regular working class stiffs look like idiots in front of the camera. When somebody once tried to follow him around with a camera to document his life, he became rabid and threatened to sue. He jets around the country saying ridiculous, factually-insupportable things. He's backing Clark even though Clark led the NATO bombing of Kosovo that Moore criticized at the time AND that Moore tendentiously connected to America's "culture of violence" in Bowling for Columbine. Oh, and the irony is that, despite his foaming at the mouth regarding Bush, the man is more responsible for putting Bush in the White House than the Supreme Court. In the weeks leading up to the election, he endlessly stumped for Ralph Nader, telling young audiences to vote for Nader and to "not be cynical by voting for the lesser of two evils." His high-profile endorsement of Nader and his numerous appearances at Nader rallies may very well have led to Gore losing some of the key states that were won and lost by only a few thousand votes, including, of course, Florida.

In short, the man is a joke. He doesn't understand American history or American culture nearly to the extent that claims to. And his films are full of errors and intentional misrepresentations of the truth. As others have said, there are plenty of places on the Internet that have already debunked "Bowling for Columbine." (Which, even if it were accurate, was logically inconsistent. Moore's larger point about Canada not being so fearful even though they own guns is lost when he goes after the NRA at the end of the film.) If gun ownership isn't the problem, as evidenced by Canada's low crime rates, then what the hell does the NRA have to do with America's violence problem? Oh, because the NRA is too "insensitive"? Was that the extent of his argument? Then why leave the picture of the little girl in Heston's complex? It's these types of actions that appeal to those among us who aren't very good at thinking and taking apart an argument to examine its pieces...so perhaps he is the idiot's thinking man.

Oh, and Moore misrepresented what the NRA was doing after the shootings. He used film clips from other rallies and represented them as having occurred at rallies immediately following the shootings, when in fact they were taken from different rallies.

Moore's films are an insult to the art of documentary film-making.

Unlike Moore, I'm not a member of the NRA, and I also don't like the NRA. I don't like Charlton Heston. But his film actually made me feel sorry for Heston, which was a feeling I thought I would never experience in this lifetime.

[willy]

Kind of like how the left goes after Limbaugh because he's a rightie?

[crawjo]

Originally posted by Jazzooo
It seems pretty clear that the most outspoken critics of Moore here are those who like W and want himmto be president for another term. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

I don't care for everything Moore has done or said, but that's an unrealistic standard--I don't feel that way about anyone, not John Lennon, not my wife, not myself. I think we have to face facts: righties will make fun of Moore because he is a leftie.

That's too relativistic, in my opinion. Facts are facts. If you want to arrive at a different interpretation, then share it. But it is overly-simplistic to just dismiss someone's criticism of another person because of their political leanings. I mean, I guess from now on whenever anyone criticizes Richard Nixon or George W. Bush or any historical figure from any period of time, anywhere, we should just remember where their political loyalties lie. After all, *obviously* abolitionists were going to be most outspoken about the slaveholders.

Originally posted by Jazzooo
It seems pretty clear that the most outspoken critics of Moore here are those who like W and want himmto be president for another term. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

I don't care for everything Moore has done or said, but that's an unrealistic standard--I don't feel that way about anyone, not John Lennon, not my wife, not myself. I think we have to face facts: righties will make fun of Moore because he is a leftie.

Jazzooo, this is truly a simple minded post from someone who otherwise usually has a thoughtful outlook on most issues.

I'm not an outspoken critic of Moore, but I know who and what he is, and I'm simply unimpressed.

It's not so much making fun of him as it is being annoyed over the fact that he constantly tries to pawn his editorialized, and sometimes fictionalized movie as a documentary, and succeeds. It's disappointing to realize how much stock one puts into the things Moore tells them up on the big screen but, as Frankiepop has shown, at the same time they are completely unwilling to look at the bigger picture when the curtains are pulled back and you are presented with actual facts that show how fictional this movie was. It's just bizarre to me.

[Uli]

Hey Scotty, talking about facts, where the WMDs?

[stonemonkts]

Originally posted by crawjo

Moore's films are an insult to the art of documentary film-making.

Unlike Moore, I'm not a member of the NRA, and I also don't like the NRA. I don't like Charlton Heston. But his film actually made me feel sorry for Heston, which was a feeling I thought I would never experience in this lifetime.

I agree with most of your characterization of Moore. I loathe Charlton Heston, and will never feel sorry for him, or any other doddering right winger, including the biggest of them all, Reagan. They can both rot slow, as far as I'm concerned, and then rot some more. Oh wait, that's what they are doing. Good.

Anyway, the moment of truth as far as Moore goes was when he duplicated his childish award ceremony rant word for word (almost gaffe for gaffe, in fact) on consecutive nights. He spouted the identical diatribe at the Spirit and Oscar award extravaganzas. What a putz. Anyone who paints him as a left wing version of O'Reilly or Limbaugh are spot on, in my opinion (although he has more gray matter than O'Reilly, but then again, who doesn't?)

Roger and Me was definitely his high water mark.

So, count me as not a righty and also not an admirer nor apologist for Moore.

[moneyp]

Originally posted by Jazzooo
It seems pretty clear that the most outspoken critics of Moore here are those who like W and want himmto be president for another term. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Consider yourself corrected. BFC was a deliberately misleading film, about as far from a documentary as you can get.

[Jazzooo]

Well, you're only two people, guys. In my experience here and elsewhere, I think the point stands when you factor in everyone else.

Anc Scott, an in-depth explanation from you about the real reason you dislike Moore doesn't prove my point, but it doesn't exactly carry a lot of extra weight for the defense either.

"I don't care for everything Moore has done or said, but that's an unrealistic standard--I don't feel that way about anyone, not John Lennon, not my wife, not myself. I think we have to face facts: righties will make fun of Moore because he is a leftie.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's too relativistic, in my opinion. Facts are facts. "


If it's true, it doesn't matter if it seems too relatvisitic imo.

I did mean to say "Most righties..." though. Sorry. And yes, it's very much the same way that lefties talk about Limbaugh. Surly you're not suggesting that the lefties are critical of Limbaugh because he actually *is* the ignorant asshole they say he is, are you?

[GoodSpeak]

Who the hell is Michael Moore?