| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
the swimmer
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1602 Posts |
 Posted - 11/11/2003 : 08:44:55
|
I read this today and thought about y'all.
How to Deal with the Lies and the Lying Liars When They Lie about "Bowling for Columbine"
by Michael Moore
One thing you get used to when you're in what's called "the public eye" is reading the humorous fiction that others like to write about you. For instance, I have read in quite respectable and trustworthy publications that a) I'm a college graduate (I'm not), b) I was a factory worker (I quit the first day), and c) I have two brothers (I have none). Newsweek wrote that I live in a penthouse on Central Park West (I live above a Baby Gap store, and not on any park), and the Internet Movie Database once listed me as the director of the Elvis movie, "Blue Hawaii" ( I was 6 at the time the film was made, but I was quite skilled in directing my sisters in building me a snowman). Lately, my favorite mistake is the one many reviewers made crediting the cartoon in "Bowling for Columbine" as being the work of the "South Park" creators. It isn't. I wrote it and my buddy Harold Moss's animation studio drew it.
I've enjoyed reading these inventions/mistakes about this "Michael Moore." I mean, who wouldn't want to fantasize about living in penthouses roughhousing with brothers you never had. But lately I've begun to see so many things about me or my work that aren't true. It's become so easy to spread these fictions through the internet (thanks mostly to lazy reporters or web junkies who do all their research by typing in "key words" and then just repeat the same mistakes). And so I wonder that if I don't correct the record, then all of the people who don't know better may just end up being filled with a bunch of stuff that isn't true.
Of course, it would take a lot of my time to contact all these sites and media outlets to correct their errors and I think it's more important I spend my time on my next book or movie so I just let it ride. But is that fair to you, the reader, who has now been told something that isn't true?
With the unexpected and overwhelming success of "Bowling for Columbine" and "Stupid White Men," the fiction that has been written or spoken about me and my work has reached a whole new level of storytelling. It's no longer about making some simple errors or calling me "Roger" Moore. It is now about organized groups going full blast trying to discredit me by knowingly making up lies and repeating them over and over in the hopes that people will believe them – and, then, stop listening to me.
Oh, that it would be so easy!
Fortunately, they are so wound up in their anger and hatred that they have ended up discrediting themselves.
Look, I accept the fact that, if I go after the Thief-in-Chief – and more people buy my book than any other nonfiction book last year – then that is naturally going to send a few of his henchmen after me. Fine. That's okay. I knew that before I got into this and I ain't whining about it now.
I also realize that you just don't go after the NRA and its supporters and then not expect them to come back at you with both barrels (so to speak). These are not nice people and they don't play nice – that's how they got to be so powerful.
So, a whole host of gun lobby groups and individual gun nuts have put up websites where the smears on me range from the pre-adolescent (I'm a "crapweasel," and a "fat fucking piece of shit") to Orwellian-style venom ("Michael Moore hates America!").
I have mostly ignored this silliness. But a few weeks ago, this lunatic crap hit the mainstream fan. CNN actually put some guy on a show saying that my film contains "so many falsehoods, one after the other, after the other, after the other." They introduced him as a "critic" and "research director" of the "Independence Institute." He seemed mighty impressive.
Except they failed to tell their viewers who he really was: a contributing editor of Gun Week Magazine.
CNN saw no need to inform the viewers that their "expert"-- who has made a career out of opposing any form of gun control–has a vested interest in convincing the public that "Bowling for Columbine" is a horribly rotten movie.
So, what do you do when the nutcases succeed in getting on CNN? Do you just keep ignoring them? How do you handle people who say the Holocaust never happened or that monkeys fly? Ignore them and they'll go away? If you give them any attention, all the nuts will come out of the woodwork.
And that's what happened. I saw another one of these lunatics, this time on MSNBC. A guy named John Lofton. He went on and on about how my movie is all made up. The anchor on MSNBC never challenged him on his lies and never told the viewers who he really was – a right wing crazy who believes Bush is too liberal. He was once an advisor to Pat Buchanan's Presidential campaign, and was a direct-mail writer for Jesse Helms. Writing in opposition to Hate Crime bills in the conservative Washington Times (where he was a columnist from '83 to '89), Lofton explained:
Take, for example, this business of so-called "anti-gay violence." This bill will be used to go after only those who commit crimes against people because they are homosexuals. But this is not the most pernicious form of "anti-gay violence." Not by a long shot.
The most violent - indeed fatal 100 percent of the time - form of "anti-gay violence" has been committed not by so-called "homophobes" who bash homosexuals - but by male homosexuals and bisexuals against other male bisexuals and homosexuals.
To date, tens of thousands of male bisexual and homosexual men are dead in our country because of AIDS, because they engaged in high-risk homosexual sex.
Is this not "anti-gay violence" which numbers its victims far beyond anything any "homophobes" have done?
Well, I figured I better deal with this because the nutters were now being turned into "respectable critics" by a media that either had an agenda or were just plain lazy.
So, how crazy are the things they've said about "Bowling for Columbine?" Here are my favorites:
"That scene where you got the gun in the bank was staged!"
Well of course it was staged! It's a movie! We built the "bank" as a set and then I hired actors to play the bank tellers and the manager and we got a toy gun from the prop department and then I wrote some really cool dialogue for me and them to say! Pretty neat, huh?
Or...
The Truth: In the spring of 2001, I saw a real ad in a real newspaper in Michigan announcing a real promotion that this real bank had where they would give you a gun (as your up-front interest) for opening up a Certificate of Deposit account. They promoted this in publications all over the country – "More Bang for Your Buck!"
There was news coverage of this bank giving away guns, long before I even shot the scene there. The Chicago Sun Times wrote about how the bank would "hand you a gun" with the purchase of a CD. Those are the precise words used by a bank employee in the film.
When you see me going in to the bank and walking out with my new gun in "Bowling for Columbine" – that is exactly as it happened. Nothing was done out of the ordinary other than to phone ahead and ask permission to let me bring a camera in to film me opening up my account. I walked into that bank in northern Michigan for the first time ever on that day in June 2001, and, with cameras rolling, gave the bank teller $1,000 – and opened up a 20-year CD account. After you see me filling out the required federal forms ("How do you spell Caucasian?") – which I am filling out here for the first time – the bank manager faxed it to the bank's main office for them to do the background check. The bank is a licensed federal arms dealer and thus can have guns on the premises and do the instant background checks (the ATF's Federal Firearms database—which includes all federally approved gun dealers—lists North Country Bank with Federal Firearms License #4-38-153-01-5C-39922).
Within 10 minutes, the "OK" came through from the firearms background check agency and, 5 minutes later, just as you see it in the film, they handed me a Weatherby Mark V Magnum rifle (If you'd like to see the outtakes, click here).
And it is that very gun that I still own to this day. I have decided the best thing to do with this gun is to melt it down into a bust of John Ashcroft and auction it off on E-Bay (more details on that later). All the proceeds will go to The Brady Campaign To Prevent Gun Violence to fight all these lying gun nuts who have attacked my film and make it possible on a daily basis for America's gun epidemic to rage on.
Here's another whopper I've had to listen to from the pro-gun groups:
"The Lockheed factory in Littleton, Colorado, has nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction!"
That's right! That big honkin' rocket sitting behind the Lockheed spokesman in "Bowling for Columbine"-- the one with "US AIRFORCE" written on it in BIG ASS letters – well, I admit it, I snuck in and painted that on that Titan IV rocket when Lockheed wasn't looking! After all, those rockets were only being used for the Weather Channel! Ha Ha Ha! I sure fooled everyone!!
Or....
The Truth: Lockheed Martin is the largest weapons-maker in the world. The Littleton facility has been manufacturing missiles, missile components, and other weapons systems for almost half a century. In the 50s, workers at the Littleton facility constructed the first Titan intercontinental ballistic missile, designed to unleash a nuclear warhead on the Soviet Union; in the mid-80s, they were partially assembling MX missiles, instruments for the minuteman ICBM, a space laser weapon called Zenith Star, and a Star Wars program known as Brilliant Pebbles.
In the full, unedited interview I did with the Lockheed spokesman, he told me that Lockheed started building nuclear missiles in Littleton and "played a role in the development of Peacekeeper MX Missiles."
As for what's currently manufactured in Littleton, McCollum told me, "They (the rockets sitting behind him) carry mainly very large national security satellites, some we can't talk about." (see him say it here)
Since that interview, the Titan IV rockets manufactured in Littleton have been critical to the war effort in both Afghanistan and Iraq. These rockets launched advanced satellites that were "instrumental in providing command-and-control operations over Iraq...for the rapid targeting of Navy Tomahawk cruise missiles involved in Iraqi strikes and clandestine communications with Special Operations Forces." (view source here).
That Lockheed lets the occasional weather or TV satellite hitch a ride on one of its rockets should not distract anyone from Lockheed's main mission and moneymaker in Littleton: to make instruments that help kill people. That two of Littleton's children decided to engineer their own mass killing is what these guys and the Internet crazies don't want to discuss.
The oddest of all the smears thrown at "Bowling for Columbine" is this one:
"The film depicts NRA president Charlton Heston giving a speech near Columbine; he actually gave it a year later and 900 miles away. The speech he did give is edited to make conciliatory statements sound like rudeness."
Um, yeah, that's right! I made it up! Heston never went there! He never said those things!
Or....
The Truth: Heston took his NRA show to Denver and did and said exactly what we recounted. From the end of my narration setting up Heston's speech in Denver, with my words, "a big pro-gun rally," every word out of Charlton Heston's mouth was uttered right there in Denver, just 10 days after the Columbine tragedy. But don't take my word – read the transcript of his whole speech. Heston devotes the entire speech to challenging the Denver mayor and mocking the mayor's pleas that the NRA "don't come here." Far from deliberately editing the film to make Heston look worse, I chose to leave most of this out and not make Heston look as evil as he actually was.
Why are these gun nuts upset that their brave NRA leader's words are in my film? You'd think they would be proud of the things he said. Except, when intercut with the words of a grieving father (whose son died at Columbine and happened to be speaking in a protest that same weekend Heston was at the convention center), suddenly Charlton Heston doesn't look so good does he? Especially to the people of Denver (and, the following year, to the people of Flint) who were still in shock over the tragedies when Heston showed up.
As for the clip preceding the Denver speech, when Heston proclaims "from my cold dead hands," this appears as Heston is being introduced in narration. It is Heston's most well-recognized NRA image – hoisting the rifle overhead as he makes his proclamation, as he has done at virtually every political appearance on behalf of the NRA (before and since Columbine). I have merely re-broadcast an image supplied to us by a Denver TV station, an image which the NRA has itself crafted for the media, or, as one article put it, "the mantra of dedicated gun owners" which they "wear on T-shirts, stamp it on the outside of envelopes, e-mail it on the Internet and sometimes shout it over the phone.". Are they now embarrassed by this sick, repulsive image and the words that accompany it?
I've also been accused of making up the gun homicide counts in the United States and various countries around the world. That is, like all the rest of this stuff, a bald-face lie. Every statistic in the film is true. They all come directly from the government. Here are the facts, right from the sources:
The U.S. figure of 11,127 gun deaths comes from a report from the Center for Disease Control. Japan's gun deaths of 39 was provided by the National Police Agency of Japan; Germany: 381 gun deaths from Bundeskriminalamt (German FBI); Canada: 165 gun deaths from Statistics Canada, the governmental statistics agency; United Kingdom: 68 gun deaths, from the Centre for Crime and Justice studies in Britain; Australia: 65 gun deaths from the Australian Institute of Criminology; France: 255 gun deaths, from the International Journal of Epidemiology.
Finally, I've even been asked about whether the two killers were at bowling class on the morning of the shootings. Well, that's what their teacher told the investigators, and that's what was corroborated by several eyewitness reports of students to the police, the FBI, and the District Attorney's office. I'll tell you who wasn't there -- me! That's why in the film I pose it as a question:
"So did Dylan and Eric show up that morning and bowl two games before moving on to shoot up the school? And did they just chuck the balls down the lane? Did this mean something?"
Of course, it's a silly discussion, and it misses the whole, larger point: that blaming bowling for their killing spree would be as dumb as blaming Marilyn Manson.
But the gun nuts don't want to discuss either specific points or larger issues because when that debate is held, they lose. Most Americans want stronger gun laws (among others, see the 2001 National Gun Policy Survey from the University of Chicago's National Opinion Research Center) – and the gun lobbies know it. That is why it's critical to distract and alter the debate – and go after anyone who questions why we have so many gun deaths in America (especially if he does it in best selling books and popular films).
I can guarantee to you, without equivocation, that every fact in my movie is true. Three teams of fact-checkers and two groups of lawyers went through it with a fine tooth comb to make sure that every statement of fact is indeed an indisputable fact. Trust me, no film company would ever release a film like this without putting it through the most vigorous vetting process possible. The sheer power and threat of the NRA is reason enough to strike fear in any movie studio or theater chain. The NRA will go after you without mercy if they think there's half a chance of destroying you. That's why we don't have better gun laws in this country – every member of Congress is scared to death of them.
Well, guess what. Total number of lawsuits to date against me or my film by the NRA? NONE. That's right, zero. And don't forget for a second that if they could have shut this film down on a technicality they would have. But they didn't and they can't – because the film is factually solid and above reproach. In fact, we have not been sued by any individual or group over the statements made in "Bowling for Columbine?" Why is that? Because everything we say is true – and the things that are our opinion, we say so and leave it up to the viewer to decide if our point of view is correct or not for each of them.
So, faced with a thoroughly truthful and honest film, those who object to the film's political points are left with the choice of debating us on the issues in the film – or resorting to character assassination. They have chosen the latter. What a sad place to be.
Actually, I have found one typo in the theatrical release of the film. It was a caption that read, "Willie Horton released by Dukakis and kills again." In fact, Willie Horton was a convicted murderer who, after escaping from furlough, raped a woman and stabbed her fiancé, but didn't kill him. The caption has been permanently corrected on the DVD and home video version of the film and replaced with, "Willie Horton released. Then rapes a woman." My apologies to Willie Horton and the Horton family for implying he is a double-murderer when he is only a single-murderer/rapist. And my apologies to the late Lee Atwater who, on his deathbed, apologized for having engineered the smear campaign against Dukakis (but correctly identified Mr. Horton as a single-murderer!).
Well, there you have it. I suppose the people who tell their make-believe stories about me and my work will continue to do so. Maybe they should be sued for knowingly libeling me. Or maybe I'll just keep laughing – laughing all the way to the end of the Bush Administration -- scheduled, I believe, for sometime in November of next year.
Yours,
Michael Moore
Director, "Bowling for Columbine"
PS. From now on, I will deal with all wacko attackos on this page. If you hear something about me that doesn't sound quite right, check in here.
|
|
|
Coldheartofstone
* Dog in the Sand *
Canada
2025 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2003 : 08:58:39
|
I love that man
She was looking for some...place....to go.... |
 |
|
|
gracie
= Cult of Ray =
United Kingdom
573 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2003 : 10:23:32
|
| Me too |
|
|
|
blarg007
= Cult of Ray =
USA
493 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2003 : 10:34:40
|
jeesh, didn't get to read all that but if the gist is that michael moore
is the victim of lies about his work -i believe it and i've heard it on
the radio -as they say : don't believe the hype.
michael moore is a really cool guy -i got to see the US premiere of
that bowling for columbine and he did a Q&A afterwards and i must say
he's a class act.
r |
|
|
|
blarg007
= Cult of Ray =
USA
493 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2003 : 10:37:09
|
although he was absent from 'rolling thunder' when it rolled thru
chicago...
MM and FB ... maybe they should team up..
r |
|
|
|
Coldheartofstone
* Dog in the Sand *
Canada
2025 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2003 : 10:38:24
|
I am liking this idea...i can see it now...
The beginning of a MUCH needed revolution....
She was looking for some...place....to go.... |
|
|
|
cvanepps
= Cult of Ray =
USA
442 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2003 : 15:23:25
|
I like Moore and the films he makes are very entertaining polemics but they're not really documentaries. He has the right to defend himself but if you watch "Bowling" with an objective eye, you can see how things like editing can cause you to make conclusions that you might not have made.
For instance, that bit when he confronts Chuck "Soylent Green is people" Heston, you can see that he staged the part where he first holds up the picture of the little girl killed in Flint, MI.
How about the Willie Horton ad "enhancement" in the VHS and DVD releases?
And the bit about the way he edited the "From my cold, dead hands" scene. This website explains it much better than I can.
http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html
I'm no NRA-nut, nor am I a Michael Moore bashing-nut, rather I'm a truth-nut. Anyway, I hope he continues to make films becuase they're fun.
-= It's not easy to kidnap a fat man =-
http://christophervanepps.iuma.com |
|
|
|
Dave Noisy
Minister of Chaos
Canada
4496 Posts |
|
|
the swimmer
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1602 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2003 : 21:37:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by cvanepps
I like Moore and the films he makes are very entertaining polemics but they're not really documentaries. He has the right to defend himself but if you watch "Bowling" with an objective eye, you can see how things like editing can cause you to make conclusions that you might not have made.
For instance, that bit when he confronts Chuck "Soylent Green is people" Heston, you can see that he staged the part where he first holds up the picture of the little girl killed in Flint, MI.
How about the Willie Horton ad "enhancement" in the VHS and DVD releases?
And the bit about the way he edited the "From my cold, dead hands" scene. This website explains it much better than I can.
http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html
I'm no NRA-nut, nor am I a Michael Moore bashing-nut, rather I'm a truth-nut. Anyway, I hope he continues to make films becuase they're fun.
-= It's not easy to kidnap a fat man =-
http://christophervanepps.iuma.com
Hey you know what's funny Einstien? If you would have READ what was written, he deals with that "rumor".
Go back to Start.
Try again. |
|
|
|
ivandivel
= Cult of Ray =
394 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2003 : 05:45:06
|
Bowling was an ok movie and an interesting look at parts of the usa, but - and it's a big butt, the end blew it for me. Moore is an entertainer, and as americans generally do, he does it well. He might have all the facts in ordnung, he might not have lied a single time. But when one presents such a pathetic ending - one get's the suspicion that he is willing to stretch things far - not to get his points through - but to convince you that he represents what is good and morally supreme. He's in bed with Bush, and he doesn't know it. |
|
|
|
the swimmer
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1602 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2003 : 07:45:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by ivandivel
Bowling was an ok movie and an interesting look at parts of the usa, but - and it's a big butt, the end blew it for me. Moore is an entertainer, and as americans generally do, he does it well. He might have all the facts in ordnung, he might not have lied a single time. But when one presents such a pathetic ending - one get's the suspicion that he is willing to stretch things far - not to get his points through - but to convince you that he represents what is good and morally supreme. He's in bed with Bush, and he doesn't know it.
What was "pathetic" about the ending....enlighten us, oh master of knowing what's pathetic. |
|
|
|
Bartholomew
= Cult of Ray =
USA
344 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2003 : 08:04:31
|
I happen to oppose the idea that guns in the hands of good guys are a bad thing. But I like Michael Moore –– Roger and Me is one of my favorite movies. I like someone who stands up for what they believe in. Few are so brave these days. And it’s sad when those opposing him make up lies about him. What a fucking third-grade tactic.
Interesting thought about what is and is not a documentary. But aren’t all documentaries slanted by the perception of their maker? Of course they are. Everyone puts their own touch on it. I saw a documentary last night about a daughter who’s father was killed in Vietnam and she never got to meet him. Well, they cued in some sad music at just the right time to amplify the melancholy. This was no accident. They were manipulating the viewer, however subtlely. All Michael Moore does is turn the volume on his amplifier up to get across his perception of the truth. And aren’t all documentaries, perceptions of the truth? Take that winged migration movie where they made the birds seem so beautiful and majestic. Well, another take would be murderer. From the worms perspective of course. Or comical, watching them drop shit bombs down on everyone’s head. There’s a movie I’d like to see. |
|
|
|
jediroller
* Dog in the Sand *
France
1718 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2003 : 08:45:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bartholomew
But aren’t all documentaries slanted by the perception of their maker? Of course they are. Everyone puts their own touch on it.
Exactly!
You've got to hand it to Moore, he doesn't hide behind his camera. For some people it's a major reproach to him, to me it's his biggest quality.
You know who's talking, it's not fucking CNN manipulating you with "objective" "information" and "the real genuine truth of the things that are actually happening before your very eyes" or whatever. It's not "These images PROVE that Mr Heston sucks goats every full moon", it's "Hey, I'm Michael Moore, I don't like Mr Heston and what he stands for and here is why". And you can endlessly discuss pros and cons, but at least he's started the discussion, not ended it.
--
"C'est la vie" whatever that means, la-de-da... |
|
|
|
cvanepps
= Cult of Ray =
USA
442 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2003 : 10:23:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by the swimmer
Hey you know what's funny Einstien? If you would have READ what was written, he deals with that "rumor".
Go back to Start.
Try again.
I read both sides of this issue, months ago, and at great length (unlike you, who seem satisfied in getting only Moore's side) and I've decided that Moore is in the wrong. Feel free to not click on the link I've provided earlier.
-= It's not easy to kidnap a fat man =-
http://christophervanepps.iuma.com |
|
|
|
mun chien andalusia
= Quote Accumulator =
Italy
2139 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2003 : 10:29:00
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bartholomew
I happen to oppose the idea that guns in the hands of good guys are a bad thing.
and who would be the nice guys if i may ask?
 join the cult of errol\and you can have a beer\without having to quit smoking
www.superabound.altervista.org |
|
|
|
apl4eris
~ Abstract Brain ~
USA
4800 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2003 : 10:35:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bartholomew
I happen to oppose the idea that guns in the hands of good guys are a bad thing. But I like Michael Moore
This confuses me - Michael Moore is an NRA member -he doesn't have anything against people having guns per se. One thing I appreciate about that movie is his open-mindedness about what could be the problem in the US, as in why al the gun violence, when other countries seem to be ok with having guns and not murdering people the way we do. Very interesting question.
I still have problems with his approach in some places, but overall I am glad he is out there and filling that niche - hopefully it will inspire others to question authority, and to ultimately question his methods and ideas as well. He sparks very important debate. |
Edited by - apl4eris on 11/12/2003 12:00:58 |
|
|
|
Bartholomew
= Cult of Ray =
USA
344 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2003 : 10:55:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by mun chien andalusia
quote:
Originally posted by Bartholomew
I happen to oppose the idea that guns in the hands of good guys are a bad thing.
and who would be the nice guys if i may ask?
join the cult of errol\and you can have a beer\without having to quit smoking
www.superabound.altervista.org
Retired librarians and great grandmothers of course––boy, you sure got me, no one is 100% "nice".
I agree with you, it would be better for no one to have guns. In a perfect world, steak knives would be outlawed and our hands rendered incapable of strangulation. In this same world parents would take responsibility for raising their children the wrong way and wouldn't try to blame the actions of an intelligent human being on an inanimate object. Most guns I've met are some stupid motherfuckers. |
|
|
|
mun chien andalusia
= Quote Accumulator =
Italy
2139 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2003 : 11:15:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bartholomew
Retired librarians and great grandmothers of course––boy, you sure got me, no one is 100% "nice".
I agree with you, it would be better for no one to have guns. In a perfect world, steak knives would be outlawed and our hands rendered incapable of strangulation. In this same world parents would take responsibility for raising their children the wrong way and wouldn't try to blame the actions of an intelligent human being on an inanimate object. Most guns I've met are some stupid motherfuckers.
thank god you are a nice person.
join the cult of errol\and you can have a beer\without having to quit smoking
www.superabound.altervista.org |
|
|
|
Bartholomew
= Cult of Ray =
USA
344 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2003 : 11:49:35
|
| But that’s where you’re wrong. I’m actually an asshole. What’s your views on water pistols? |
|
|
|
the swimmer
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1602 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2003 : 11:55:44
|
| Those battery powered ones made good bidets. |
|
|
|
Cheeseman1000
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
Iceland
8201 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2003 : 11:56:45
|
The "whats a nice guy" debate could run and run, but I think the point MM was making that guns shouldn't be available to those that are most definitely not nice.
For example, Timothy McVeigh's cousin/brother I think. There was an audible gasp and scared laughter in the cinema when he spoke about his part in the Oklahoma bombing etc., then went on to say that "there are some wackos out there..."
Also, whatever you think of Michael Moore (and I can see how it is possible to dislike), you have to admit that the film makes some compelling and even poignant arguments.
 "I have joined the Cult Of Frank/And I have dearly paid"
|
|
|
|
apl4eris
~ Abstract Brain ~
USA
4800 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2003 : 12:01:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bartholomew
But that’s where you’re wrong. I’m actually an asshole. What’s your views on water pistols?
Hey Bartholomew, just wondering if you saw my post up there.
 "I partied with the Cult of Frank / Bob ate all the dip" |
Edited by - apl4eris on 11/12/2003 12:01:47 |
|
|
|
cvanepps
= Cult of Ray =
USA
442 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2003 : 12:06:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cheeseman1000
Also, whatever you think of Michael Moore (and I can see how it is possible to dislike), you have to admit that the film makes some compelling and even poignant arguments.
I admit this, and I actually agree with what Moore's Bowling had to say. But I think it's possible to make those arguments without misleading the viewer through creative editing. I've edited videotape on professional equipment so I know how it can radically alter the final product.
-= It's not easy to kidnap a fat man =-
http://christophervanepps.iuma.com |
|
|
|
ivandivel
= Cult of Ray =
394 Posts |
Posted - 11/13/2003 : 02:18:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by the swimmer
quote:
Originally posted by ivandivel
Bowling was an ok movie and an interesting look at parts of the usa, but - and it's a big butt, the end blew it for me. Moore is an entertainer, and as americans generally do, he does it well. He might have all the facts in ordnung, he might not have lied a single time. But when one presents such a pathetic ending - one get's the suspicion that he is willing to stretch things far - not to get his points through - but to convince you that he represents what is good and morally supreme. He's in bed with Bush, and he doesn't know it.
What was "pathetic" about the ending....enlighten us, oh master of knowing what's pathetic.
What - I am alone with this opinion? I can't remember his exact words, but when he's at the old and senile Heston's house with the picture in his hand, speaking/shouting emotionally - almost in tears - at this obviously intellectually impaired man - fuck that was pathetic. It was an appeal to the heart - as many people (Moore included) have critized your government for basing its politics on (the fear hypothesis). Bush uses fear and anger, Moore uses ridicule and tears. But totally overkilled. Was it enlightening? |
|
|
|
Cheeseman1000
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
Iceland
8201 Posts |
Posted - 11/13/2003 : 03:01:31
|
It was definitely cruel, I give you that, and MM got a lot of stick about it at the time of the movie. I'd heard about this interview before I saw the movie, so I specifically checked it out. All the points he makes are valid and accurate, however its true that he does over-egg the omelette a bit with someone who is, lets face it, senile.
However, if Charlton Heston can still stand up and make speeches to the NRA about prying his gun from his cold dead hands, I think Moore is perfectly at liberty to get a bit emotional about this subject, especially considering some of the information he has uncovered during the making of the film. He appears to be a very honest and open guy, and very passionate in his causes, and therefore I think he was justified in his interview technique.
Moore was trying to put a point across with the movie, of course, but in this case the ends justified the means.
"I have joined the Cult Of Frank/And I have dearly paid"
|
|
|
|
ivandivel
= Cult of Ray =
394 Posts |
Posted - 11/13/2003 : 03:23:44
|
| I thought that one of Moore's points was that much politics in america is based on fear - emotions. Moore obviously has his political project (which i don't oppose) - but he should have been able to convey his message without basing it on emotions - even though it is the most effective way of affecting other people. And i don't believe for a second that he was as emotional as he tried to look. How can anyone get upset speaking with senile old people? He is an entertainer, a dancing bear. |
|
|
|
Cheeseman1000
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
Iceland
8201 Posts |
Posted - 11/13/2003 : 03:40:44
|
It is an emotive subject. Yes, MM has an agenda, but its a good cause. And OK, he is an entertainer, but thats his act, his thing. He does get worked up, but thats how his message is put across. I don't think you could compare him to the US government in that way, and people are more intelligent than some give them credit for: making people fear the government is a completely different thing to appealing to peoples better nature by using an emotive subject.
"I have joined the Cult Of Frank/And I have dearly paid"
|
|
|
|
ivandivel
= Cult of Ray =
394 Posts |
Posted - 11/13/2003 : 04:55:58
|
I can see what you're typing, I guess it's just a matter of personal taste (and possibly cultural differences). I understand and agree with his points, i just think he'd be a little more succesfull in the long run if he wasn't a dancing bear. I think the comparison with Bush is fair, they're both dancing bears. That one of them happens to be smarter than the other changes very little for me. But that's just my humble opinion. And guns are a very little problem here, so it does not contain the same sense of emotionality or urgency as i suppose it does for you. |
|
|
|
jediroller
* Dog in the Sand *
France
1718 Posts |
Posted - 11/13/2003 : 06:50:50
|
quote:
Originally posted by ivandivel
And i don't believe for a second that he was as emotional as he tried to look. How can anyone get upset speaking with senile old people?
Senile old people with guns upset me.
I see your point though, Ivan. He does use his adversary's methods to a certain extent. But as Cheeseman says, it's for a good cause. Although I certainly thought the little scene where he leaves the little girls picture against a wall before leaving Heston's property was way too melodramatic.
But I forgive him because he did manage to make Mr Heston say what he truly believes - that violence in America is an ethnic problem (!!!). That confession was priceless. He should have cut it then and there. That would have been smart and manipulative editing.
--
"C'est la vie" whatever that means, la-de-da... |
|
|
|
the swimmer
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1602 Posts |
Posted - 11/13/2003 : 06:52:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by jediroller
quote:
Originally posted by ivandivel
And i don't believe for a second that he was as emotional as he tried to look. How can anyone get upset speaking with senile old people?
Senile old people with guns upset me.
I see your point though, Ivan. He does use his adversary's methods to a certain extent. But as Cheeseman says, it's for a good cause. Although I certainly thought the little scene where he leaves the little girls picture against a wall before leaving Heston's property was way too melodramatic.
But I forgive him because he did manage to make Mr Heston say what he truly believes - that violence in America is an ethnic problem (!!!). That confession was priceless. He should have cut it then and there. That would have been smart and manipulative editing.
--
"C'est la vie" whatever that means, la-de-da...
DAMN ETHNICS....
What an ass he was. |
|
|
|
Danishboy
- FB Fan -
Denmark
175 Posts |
Posted - 11/21/2003 : 05:26:44
|
I just saw the movie yesterday, it made me sick.
Maybe because i´m a victim of the same fear-strucken society.
I also seen rescue 911 and cops, and i never thought the effect it would have on me.
I loved the bit in south central, makes you wanna go to that place. Seems to be more nice people around, that they want you to believe.
Mr Heston "Not from my dead cold hands"
I can wait.
Man of steel |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
