What's your opinion on Michael Moore?

[Banks2334]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm probably the most far right wing nut job on this forum, so you know what I think.

Having said that, I wish, we conservatives had our version of "Michael Moore." Hopefully we can find someone who is not oppossed to creative editing and who is in favor of trying to destroy people and employers.

Lastly, I'm not going to be one of those people who judge "Sicko" without seeing it, (I won't see it), but I don't understand the idea of going to Cuba, and holding up their communist health care system as an idea to emmulate. How many world leaders travel to Cuba for treatment? You know how all of those Cubans risk their lives on flimsy rafts trying to get to America? Perhaps Moore will go down to South Florida and tell those boat refugees that they are wrong, and convince them to turn around and paddle back to Cuba's "wonderful" system.

But like I said, I wish we had our own "Michael Moore" that the media would fall all over for. That would be great.

[/ QUOTE ]
Coors,
The right has plenty of people who do their own creative editing(Bush,Fox News,Coulter, etc).
World leaders don't go to Cuba for medical treatment because they can afford the best. Michael Moore is trying to point out how f-ed up our medical/pharmacutical industry is. He's not saying to emmulate the Cuban system, but for some poor/uninsured people, going to Cuba or another country for treatment may be their only alternative. The fact that 40+ million people in this country do not have health insurance is a disgrace.

[idrinkcoors]

Banks,

President Bush doesn't make movies, and even if he did, CNN, MSNB, NY Times, etc would rip him to shreads, whereas they drool over Michael Moore's every move.

And I don't think that government should hand us all free health insurance. What's next? Free auto insurance? Free home owners insurance? The money has to come from somewhere, and we didn't get to be the greatest country on Earth by emmulating communisim.

Speaking of communism/capitalism, I hope that Moore will take some of the millions he has made by tearing down people, government servants, and employers and donate it to Catholic hospital charities. That would be a pleasant surprise.

[idrinkcoors]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm probably the most far right wing nut job on this forum, so you know what I think.

[/ QUOTE ]

So... Colorado Springs, huh?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. Bunch of hippy tree huggers there. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[sirio11]

Wow, I was right, I'm in the minority (at least here on 2p2).

But my theory is the hate of the guy has more to do with the "liberal" media hating him and of course the beeeeee crowd just repeating what they hear, than with his documentary techniques (or claims about being dishonest). Since hardly any of the haters is an expert on the field (or have done any research for that matter) , and the real experts in the field, keep awarding him prize after prize; they don't seem to care about Michael's supposedly dishonest methods.

It's seems also really weird to me the passion for the "truth" and "honesty" of some of the haters. If we'd have more people with such passion in this country, a lot (and I mean A LOT) of people will be alive today instead of dead in some useless war. It's like life portrayed in a documentary is more important to them than the real life.

[Cry Me A River]

I obv haven't seen Sicko but I think it's pretty obvious the point Moore is trying to make. Not that the USA should emulate Cuba in any way, rather, how pathetic is it that a 3rd world country, communist or otherwise, has a health care system that is even comperable to the US? Let alone better is some aspects! That it's Cuba, perhaps the most hated country in the world from the government's perspective just drives the point home harder.


I think all this misses the real point.

Why does Michael Moore even have a platform at all?

Television news has becomes so useless and so toothless that the marketplace has corrected itself. Documentaries having any sort of cultural force in the movie industry was unheard of 25 years ago. Now we have Moore, Fast Food Nation, The Corporation... All these documentaries suddely breaking through commercially. Why? And we also have shows like The Daily Show/Colbert Report and Penn & Teller's [censored]. Fake news is nothing new, but did anyone every actually consider Chevy Chase's Week-end Update on SNL a viable news alternative?

Unconventional news is obviously becoming more and more important. The obvious reason why is that conventional news sources suck.

25 years ago, it would have been 60 Minutes or Walter Cronkite, not Michael Moore and they would have done a far better job of it. America now has three 24hr news cable channels and none of them hold a candle to The CBS Evening News of 25 years ago. Or hell, Edward R. Murrow fifty years ago.

These documentaries benefit by not being hamstrung by corporate news policies and corporate news budgets. That is why they're appearing in movie theatres. However, this is a double edged sword because when they are driven by a singular personality like Michael Moore they also don't benefit from the kind of oversight and editing that a proper newsroom structure brings. Nobody is telling Michael Moore when he's crossing the line or to doublecheck his facts. This is both a blessing and a curse.

[suzzer99]

Bottom line is, more than most, I think the issue of corporate accountability in this country is important enough to Moore worth it despite all these shortcomings.

Also if you look at any kind of movement, you need a carrot and a stick. A bad cop. W/o Malcom X do you think MLK would have won nearly as many concessions? Or say someone like Gloria Steinem and Andrea Dworkin to come along before Madonna made girl power cool? I bet there was some Indian terrorist dude that made Gandhi's life a lot easier. Anyway for liberals, Moore is your bad cop. Like it or not, you need him on that wall. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[john voight]

Selected text aboutbout his latest movie taken from from Wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicko

Michael Moore accompanies a number of rescue workers injured after the World Trade Center attacks of 2001 to the U.S. Guantanamo Bay detainment camp (an American territory) to ask for health care for the 9/11 responders. When unable to receive care there, they move on to Havana, Cuba, so that they can receive medical treatment they would otherwise not be able to afford.

Fox News called Sicko "brilliant and uplifting" with Moore showing a heightened "maturity" in a film that "never talks down or baits the audience."

[private joker]

Political Opinions: Agree with him 65% of the time; the rest he goes overboard

Delivering Message: I think he succeeds about 45% of the time; sometimes he's on the nose, other times he's just annoying and even pisses off his supporters

Filmmaking ability: Extremely talented. I think it's obvious he knows how to make an entertaining, exceptionally well-crafted piece of documentary cinema. Whether it's biased, whether or not you agree, whether or not you're offended, you really can't dismiss his talent at manipulating sound, image, and emotion. I wish more people -- especially those who hate him -- would at least acknowledge what I think is pretty goddam obvious filmmaking talent.

Furthermore, I think if he wrote and edited a scripted comedy film -- where even politics was swept under the carpet -- it would be very good.

Unfortunately, people seem to conflate his ideas with his technical ability and are unable to separate the two to criticize one and praise the other.

[Pete H]

[ QUOTE ]
His movies are not accurate documentaries. They are usually designed to show something (that he is against) through a highly sensationalized effort, depicting all sorts of clown acts.

This makes for good entertainment. I have only seen two movies, and was a huge fan of Bowling; it was very funny in its own way. Almost as if it was a drama version of Borat. Fahrenheit was uber lame. I was totally let down b/c he stepped back from the "funny stuff" and was actually making an attempt for the movie to be "credible".

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with statements above. But disagree with this:

[ QUOTE ]

Do I hate the guy? Yes. Why? B/c he is pretending. He is pretending that his work is important; that his views should be taken seriously. IRL, he is a clown b/c of this. If he would say "these are just movies that portray my exaggerated opinion on things" my respect for him would be 10x more.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't hate him at all. Anyone with a brain can see where he comes from.

Fahrenheit was what it was because Moore tried to make people to vote whoever was against Bush.

Majority of people are brainwashed puppets who blindly believe in random preacher they've chosen. Moore was trying to re-brainwash these puppets with the same tools his opponents have been successfully using for ages.

[Soulman]

[ QUOTE ]
Private companies shouldn't have an obligation to keep people employeed. It's government's job to sustain them once a company, in holding to the obligation it has towards it's owners/shareholds has to lay them off to save/make more money.



Thats pretty commie.

[/ QUOTE ]
The definition of lefty is pretty different in the US than here in Europe, but believing in a basic welfare system, in this instance the government paying a minimal unemployment benefit (?) is commie?