I don't agree with all of M Moores politics, but I really like him. Sicko was brilliant, Bowling for Columbine and Farenheit 911 were great too and can't wait till Capitalism: a love story opens. Just because he's rich doesn't mean that capitalism was the source...there are loads of rich people in socialist and communist countries too who don't like the economic systems!!
My problem with Michael Moore is not so much his politics or even his movies...
It's the fact that every time I see him he's trying to convince the world that he's "just a big simple white guy trying get by like everyone else..."
Whatever! He's a Primadona! In fact he's one of the biggest Primadona's in Hollywood.
When Fahrenheit 911 was up for an Oscar, I went to his web site to try and learn more about him, and all that was posted on every link was a campaign to get the Academy voters to make sure they voted for his movie.
Just cause you wear a baseball cap doesn't mean you're "just a regular guy."
I can't stand MM. He has been exposed for putting false information (lies) in his movies. After knowing what lengths he goes to to prove a point, I wonder how people can even listen to him with any seriousness at all. Yeah, his little act that he is regular Joe is hilarious. There is definitely a market for what he does. People eat it up.
I disagree with the comment that he's not accurate in the information in his documentaries. Anything that may have been 'exposed'...I'd like to see how much of any of that was not Republican or Fox News sponsored. You can check his resources on his web site OR on google..he goes to great lengths to support his arguments.
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and not think that you were implying that those who like MM are unintelligent because they are eating up what he says and actually do take some things seriously he says. I could very easily say that Glen Beck has been exposed as a complete liar and those that like him are uneducated inbreds and eat up everything he says---its no different. But yet it depends on your interpretation of things doesn't it?
I don't agree with everything MM does, but I am glad he's made his movies and think the US is better off because of his contributions.
What I don't understand is how he thinks capitalism has not helped him. The entire idea behind the free market is that you put the product out there (let's say Fahrenheit 9/11) and let the market choose who should win. And if the market likes it, you win money. Apple put out the iPod, and we bought it. Microsoft put out their version (what's it called?) and we did not.
So MM put out his movie(s) and ...? He makes a bundle of money because people go watch it. I don't see what there is to argue about. He has benefited. If this was a purely socialist system (which it is not, nor do I believe currently exists anywhere in the world), he would receive only a marginal portion of that while the rest was distributed to those in "need."
Well, this is not a socialist system, and MM HAS benefit from the free market, and he is fooling himself and no one else to say that he is not a beneficiary. It's only the free market that could even support a goof like him. Any other system would prevent the uninformed movie goer from making a choice about what pandering is presented as proof of public policy poorly pondered (whether it's 9/11, health care, economics, or guns).
The reality is that MM is a film maker and an man with an opinion, and he's not trying to present an objective look at anything, but his own slant on the world. There's no accounting for taste--but taste is only permitted when choice exists. And fortunately for MM, Americans have chosen him to the amount of millions of green backs.
I read recently a clarification of this movie....If I could remember where I read it I'd post the source...I think it was the Guardian...anyway apparently it said that in the movie MM doesn't actually have a problem with capitalism in general just the wacked out version of capitalism that we have now. What would we do without the wacked out capitalism though...I love my episodes of cribs don't you?
I don't know what an episode of cribs is, but it must be likeable.
Yeah, I agree that our version of capitalism has some serious problems with it. However, I'm not sure whether it is capitalism that is the problems or just human nature. Greed, selfishness, dishonesty, and all those things in human nature are present in any kind of system...they don't go away with socialism, or social welfare, or communism, or liberalism, or conservatism, or republicanism or any -ism (quote preferred line from "Ferris Beuller's Day Off" here); they just manifest differently. Corruption is corruption is corruption.
I guess my big problem with MM is not that he has an opinion about capitalism, even if I don't always agree with it, or even that i occasionally might think he makes a point (not that I am saying he does), but just that he presents it in such an obnoxious, one sided, obviously insane way...kind of like Rush Limbaugh. But when MM says he's not benefited from capitalism: C'MON! You have got to be kidding me!
Perhaps it is symptomatic of our culture that the only way for an opinion to gain resonance is that it must be dramatic, one sided, and often contain slander and misleading statements.
Why not be more sane?
Perhaps it is a pipe dream, as even I have been prone, in my past and probably my future, to make obnoxious statements. But I don't necessarily think MM helps the dialogue, but merely fuels partisan anger on both sides of the aisle.
Great point on this one Daniel B. I think you hit the nail on the head.
Rush L. is a good comparison.
I have done a quick look into his some of his sources and he generally presents facts, but then twists and exaggerates to his benefit in his presentation.
I also agree that he is just another who fans the flames of division and discontent.
What if an advocate approached a topic sanely and presented their views without slander? 
9 comments:
I don't agree with all of M Moores politics, but I really like him. Sicko was brilliant, Bowling for Columbine and Farenheit 911 were great too and can't wait till Capitalism: a love story opens. Just because he's rich doesn't mean that capitalism was the source...there are loads of rich people in socialist and communist countries too who don't like the economic systems!!
My problem with Michael Moore is not so much his politics or even his movies...
It's the fact that every time I see him he's trying to convince the world that he's "just a big simple white guy trying get by like everyone else..."
Whatever! He's a Primadona! In fact he's one of the biggest Primadona's in Hollywood.
When Fahrenheit 911 was up for an Oscar, I went to his web site to try and learn more about him, and all that was posted on every link was a campaign to get the Academy voters to make sure they voted for his movie.
Just cause you wear a baseball cap doesn't mean you're "just a regular guy."
I can't stand MM. He has been exposed for putting false information (lies) in his movies. After knowing what lengths he goes to to prove a point, I wonder how people can even listen to him with any seriousness at all.
Yeah, his little act that he is regular Joe is hilarious.
There is definitely a market for what he does. People eat it up.
I disagree with the comment that he's not accurate in the information in his documentaries. Anything that may have been 'exposed'...I'd like to see how much of any of that was not Republican or Fox News sponsored. You can check his resources on his web site OR on google..he goes to great lengths to support his arguments.
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and not think that you were implying that those who like MM are unintelligent because they are eating up what he says and actually do take some things seriously he says. I could very easily say that Glen Beck has been exposed as a complete liar and those that like him are uneducated inbreds and eat up everything he says---its no different. But yet it depends on your interpretation of things doesn't it?
I don't agree with everything MM does, but I am glad he's made his movies and think the US is better off because of his contributions.
What I don't understand is how he thinks capitalism has not helped him. The entire idea behind the free market is that you put the product out there (let's say Fahrenheit 9/11) and let the market choose who should win. And if the market likes it, you win money. Apple put out the iPod, and we bought it. Microsoft put out their version (what's it called?) and we did not.
So MM put out his movie(s) and ...? He makes a bundle of money because people go watch it. I don't see what there is to argue about. He has benefited. If this was a purely socialist system (which it is not, nor do I believe currently exists anywhere in the world), he would receive only a marginal portion of that while the rest was distributed to those in "need."
Well, this is not a socialist system, and MM HAS benefit from the free market, and he is fooling himself and no one else to say that he is not a beneficiary. It's only the free market that could even support a goof like him. Any other system would prevent the uninformed movie goer from making a choice about what pandering is presented as proof of public policy poorly pondered (whether it's 9/11, health care, economics, or guns).
The reality is that MM is a film maker and an man with an opinion, and he's not trying to present an objective look at anything, but his own slant on the world. There's no accounting for taste--but taste is only permitted when choice exists. And fortunately for MM, Americans have chosen him to the amount of millions of green backs.
I read recently a clarification of this movie....If I could remember where I read it I'd post the source...I think it was the Guardian...anyway apparently it said that in the movie MM doesn't actually have a problem with capitalism in general just the wacked out version of capitalism that we have now. What would we do without the wacked out capitalism though...I love my episodes of cribs don't you?
I don't know what an episode of cribs is, but it must be likeable.
Yeah, I agree that our version of capitalism has some serious problems with it. However, I'm not sure whether it is capitalism that is the problems or just human nature. Greed, selfishness, dishonesty, and all those things in human nature are present in any kind of system...they don't go away with socialism, or social welfare, or communism, or liberalism, or conservatism, or republicanism or any -ism (quote preferred line from "Ferris Beuller's Day Off" here); they just manifest differently. Corruption is corruption is corruption.
I guess my big problem with MM is not that he has an opinion about capitalism, even if I don't always agree with it, or even that i occasionally might think he makes a point (not that I am saying he does), but just that he presents it in such an obnoxious, one sided, obviously insane way...kind of like Rush Limbaugh. But when MM says he's not benefited from capitalism: C'MON! You have got to be kidding me!
Perhaps it is symptomatic of our culture that the only way for an opinion to gain resonance is that it must be dramatic, one sided, and often contain slander and misleading statements.
Why not be more sane?
Perhaps it is a pipe dream, as even I have been prone, in my past and probably my future, to make obnoxious statements. But I don't necessarily think MM helps the dialogue, but merely fuels partisan anger on both sides of the aisle.
Great point on this one Daniel B. I think you hit the nail on the head.
Rush L. is a good comparison.
I have done a quick look into his some of his sources and he generally presents facts, but then twists and exaggerates to his benefit in his presentation.
I also agree that he is just another who fans the flames of division and discontent.
Post a Comment