What's your opinion on Michael Moore?

[sirio11]

What's your take on him? Love him? Hate him? Don't care? Opinion about his work?

I have never understood the hate for the guy, I wish there were more Americans like him. I don't know if I'm in the minority here, but I just love people changing their environment for good (at least trying). But there is something about our society these days, loathing the good guys (or as they use to say to feel better themselves, the self-proclaimed "good" guys)

I can't help it, but I love the guy, I loved Bowling for Columbine, Fahrenheit 9-11 and I'm really waiting to see Sicko. I think all those films will stand the test of time.

So, what do you think? Has your opinion about him or his films changed with the years?

By the way, he'll be on the Oprah show this Tuesday June 5th talking about Sicko.

[El Diablo]

sirio,

I'm a fan. I think some people hate him because they feel like he's pretending to be an impartial journalist. But he's not. He's a documentary filmmaker with a very strong point of view. Obviously he spins his work in a manner that supports the points he is trying to make.

[Jorge10]

[ QUOTE ]
sirio,

I'm a fan. I think some people hate him because they feel like he's pretending to be an impartial journalist. But he's not. He's a documentary filmmaker with a very strong point of view. Obviously he spins his work in a manner that supports the points he is trying to make.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with this.

I like some of his documentaries, but I take them for what they are, extremely biased pieces of work. I think he at least gets people to talk about issues that are kind of important, such as gun control, health care, etc. I think a lot of people in this country wouldnt talk about those issues if it werent for his documentaries. Another problem is that there is no alternative. If you didnt like his movie about gun control(Bowling for Columbine) there is no other documentary that is unbiased and as interesting as his. I wish someone would make unbiased documentaries that are fun to watch, but until that happens Michael Moore is the only show in town as one would say.

[MrMon]

[ QUOTE ]
He's a documentary filmmaker with a very strong point of view. Obviously he spins his work in a manner that supports the points he is trying to make.

[/ QUOTE ]

So did Leni Riefenstahl.

I think "documentary filmmaker with a very strong point of view" is just a polite way of saying "propagandist". Talent, no doubt. But he puts it to questionable uses, sort of like Oliver Stone.

[Los Feliz Slim]

[ QUOTE ]
So did Leni Riefenstahl.

[/ QUOTE ]

Come on, now. Sure, Michael Moore might be a propagandist, but the point of view he's espousing isn't fascism and genocide.

Personally, I think he's a loudmouth and a hypocrite (there's a fair amount of information out there about how he's treated his employees / people on his shoots). Politically I happen to agree with a lot of what he says and I'm glad that somebody's saying it, but he could do a much better job. His attack on an obviously senile Charlton Heston made me squirm.

[Pudge714]

He is intellectually dishonest and a propagandist. It is unfortunate how many people listen to him and think what he is saying the gospel, when rudimentary research will show he is intentionally omitting key information to push his political agenda. I know people might respond to this by saying, but what about Limabaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly don't they do the same? Firstly two wrongs don't make a right and secondly I expect a higher standard from a documentary than a daily tv show or radio show where the hosts are clearly designed to be pundits and not reporters.

[guids]

[ QUOTE ]
He is intellectually dishonest and a propagandist. It is unfortunate how many people listen to him and think what he is saying the gospel, when rudimentary research will show he is intentionally omitting key information to push his political agenda. I know people might respond to this by saying, but what about Limabaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly don't they do the same? Firstly two wrongs don't make a right and secondly I expect a higher standard from a documentary than a daily tv show or radio show where the hosts are clearly designed to be pundits and not reporters.

[/ QUOTE ]


The other thing is, you have to really really search around for a fact that hannity and co say, that is a blatant lie. Yes, they do spin some things, but usually they present facts, and than jump to some weird/wrong conclusion based on the facts presented. Moore just lies. O Reilly is a different beast than hannity and co imo, I like him most of the time.

[kyleb]

[ QUOTE ]
He is intellectually dishonest and a propagandist.

[/ QUOTE ]

This sums up my opinion on him. Also he's fat and unpresentable.

[boomshakalaka]

[ QUOTE ]
I expect a higher standard from a documentary than a daily tv show or radio show where the hosts are clearly designed to be pundits and not reporters.

[/ QUOTE ]

meh, I dont know man. I doubt that this is any clearer then that moore is a propagandist. He says hes making documentaries, they say they are making news shows. Sadly the average person is equally, and very, likely to believe both of these liars.

Colbert and Stuart, now they are blatantly not real news, yet ironically they are two of the best sources of real news. Funny how our media works, eh?

[MrMon]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So did Leni Riefenstahl.

[/ QUOTE ]

Come on, now. Sure, Michael Moore might be a propagandist, but the point of view he's espousing isn't fascism and genocide.


[/ QUOTE ]

Neither did Riefenstahl. In fact, what she did was glorify Hitler and the Nazis, presenting them in a positive light. All Moore does is demonize his enemies. In that respect, Moore is a hack, it's easy to demonize, glorification, that takes an artist.