[guids]

[ QUOTE ]
I think you're getting worked up over nothing here.

There was a claim made that people criticize Moore because his documentaries aren't really documentaries in that they are biased. The rebuttal was that the "experts" [in film] implicitly disagree because they keep awarding him in documentary categories. Your response to this was: What Experts? Hollywood. I don't know who else you'd expect, but okay. Now, you seem just confused when you write:

[ QUOTE ]
Not to mention the fact taht Im sure that documentary filmmakers arent the most unbiased people around.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly -- documentary aren't (nor are they supposed to be) unbiased. We agree --- the criticism of Moore being a bad documentarian (or not a documentarian at all) because his films are biased is stupid.

[ QUOTE ]
When debating politics, what the [censored] does it matter what a filmmaker thinks?

[/ QUOTE ]

It doesn't matter what he thinks. Nobody cares what he says because he is Michael Moore (nobody says "well if Michael Moore believes it to be true....") However, because he is a filmaker he can bring out a discussion on issues and/or raise awareness.

Michael Moore's role in political discussions is no different than a columnist in a paper/magazine or an editorial board.

[/ QUOTE ]


Movies, Television. based on or re-creating an actual event, era, life story, etc., that purports to be factually accurate and contains no fictional elements: a documentary life of Gandhi.





You are very confused on what the meaning of documentary is.