Unveling a new sig , and hating Michael Moore.

[Brian Damage]

Originally posted by Lil' Timmy
i thought you had already gotten off. welp, judging from my above post, i think the wagon's up and running, get on boys, "let's roll!"

Yeah, but it was so much fun on the wagon that I decided to sneak back on. But it's late here (well, early technically), so I might just find a spot at the back and take a snooze.

 

[Lil' Timmy]

you're taking a nap now? it was just getting good.. i can never judge the momentum of my bandwagon..

oh and, "hypoothesis" haha..

 

[pat_thetic]

Ahem... http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html

 

[Lil' Timmy]

we've been waiting for you pat..

ahem.. http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2003/8/12/171427/607

battle of the links begins!!! just know

3y3 r t3h 1337 1i|\||<3r!!!11!!!1!!uno!!!one!!!thenumberone!!!!isaidthenumberone11!!!!11!!!11@fiveminusfour1@!!1!!!@2!!!!1

 

[Maskirovka]

Originally posted by Lil' Timmy
we've been waiting for you pat..

yep...pat chimes in with his one word paste-a-link post.
you hardly ever have any of your own ideas, pat. :\

 

[iamironsam]

Have you ever seen a documentary without an agenda? Hell no, what would be the point? I mean agendas are inherent to documentaries. They're trying to bring the topic of their documentary under their particular perspective into the public eye.

If you honestly believe that all documentaries are ment to take a neutral stance, turn on the History channel and point out to me one documentary that doesn't vilify the Nazis.

 

[ductonius]

I would like to take this opportunity to point ot that Michael Moore has stated that it is not in fact to be taken seriously given that its a book of comedy.



-------------------------------------------------
Transcript of interview of Michael Moore by Lou Dobbs
-------------------------------------------------

DOBBS: Salon.com just took you to task on this book, pointing out glaring inaccuracies, which -- what in the world...

MOORE: Some of these, I think they found some guy named Dan was named Dave, and there was another thing. But you know, look, this is a book of political humor. So, I mean, I don't respond to that sort of stuff, you know.

DOBBS: Glaring inaccuracies?

MOORE: No, I don't. Why should I? How can there be inaccuracy in comedy? You know.

DOBBS: That does give one license. I think you may have given all of us a loophole.

MOORE: When Jonathan Swift said that what the Irish do is eat their young, in other words, that's what the British were proposing during the famine, I think that, you know, you have to understand satire.

DOBBS: It was metaphorical. And when you say that president...

MOORE: Well, your point was that Salon and others are like liberals, so why would they -- actually, the only attacks on the book have come from liberals.

DOBBS: Is that right?

MOORE: Yes.

DOBBS: Perhaps that's because, again, just dealing with what they know.

MOORE: Yes, maybe. Or maybe they're just -- some people get a little jealous. That's what you do. "How come he's on TV? He's on Lou Dobbs! What's going on?"

DOBBS: And it's selling well?

MOORE: It's been the No. 1 book in the country for the last month. How is that, at a time when supposedly there's 80 percent approval ratings for George W. Bush?

DOBBS: That's pretty good. And that's the next question I had for you. A couple things...

MOORE: That's my question for you. Why do you think it is? I don't have the answer.

DOBBS: Well, I will hardly pretend to be an expert.

MOORE: How could this be the No. 1 book? It's selling more than Grisham and Clancy right now, at a time when supposedly everybody's behind Bush. And this is nothing but a scathing attack on who he is, what he stands for and what he's done to the country.

DOBBS: Filled with glaring inaccuracies.

MOORE: Filled with glaring, comedic inaccuracies. And actually written by sweatshop workers in Honduras. Has that been pointed out yet? I think we might as well reveal all right now.

-------------------------------------------------

The book "Stupid White Men" is comedy, AKA fiction, as Michael Moore has stated himself.

 

[Lil' Timmy]

Originally posted by ductonius
I would like to take this opportunity to point ot that Michael Moore has stated that it is not in fact to be taken seriously given that its a book of comedy.

[stuff]

The book "Stupid White Men" is comedy, AKA fiction, as Michael Moore has stated himself.

yeah, some people can never get their head around sarcasm. :/

 

[Maskirovka]

Originally posted by Lil' Timmy
yeah, some people can never get their head around sarcasm. :/

yes...comedy just escapes some people when it deals with anything even close to a serious issue.

and on another note:

how can you think this movie is a documentary? (screw the academy if they thought it was one...they're as dumb as you) because it was shot like one? documentaries, if they're even trying to be truthful, are usually on channels like the history or discovery channel...or on some newsmagazine show like dateline or 60 minutes.

if you think something Moore created is attempting to be serious and truthful in every way you're just being naive.

but what is truthful, as people pointed out, is that gun violence in america is a serious issue. if moore can get people thinking and arguing about it by making a movie about it, then he's accomplished his goal.

if he makes you outraged about some people's views on gun violence and the NRA, then he's done what the tried to do. he made some people laugh their ass off, and he made some people really pissed because they can't take a joke.

the joke's on you...he's laughing at all this criticism right now while he sits at home and rakes in the video rental cash and uses it to make more stuff that you'll watch and hate him for.

but either way, you're thinking about gun violence. do something about it.

 

[Maxi]

Well it certanly isn't a comedy film... i think it fits into the category of "documentary".

 

[Maskirovka]

Originally posted by MaxiKana
Well it certanly isn't a comedy film... i think it fits into the category of "documentary".

if bowling for columbine is a real documentary then i guess blair witch was real too!

 

[Lil' Timmy]

Originally posted by Maskirovka
if bowling for columbine is a real documentary then i guess blair witch was real too!

no, there is a big difference, i think you're wrong in your charcterization of moore's work. blair witch was done by actor's puposely portraying characters. even if you want to believe that moore himself is a character, the vast majority of the film time in his movies is taken up by people who are not actors. this is what makes it a 'documentary'. i can see why people have a misconception about what a documentary is, but it's a misconception nonetheless. documentaries do not attempt to objectively portray the 'truth', nor does news, nor any edutainment oyu can see on thc, discovery, etc. all documentaries, whether it's as obvious as moore's or not, present someone's take on reality, and are attempts to present this take in an intertaining way. of course bowling for columbine is a documentary.

 

[Baal]

I'm not sure if the bowling for columbine facts were lies, or whatever you are saying were lies, but....the point still stands, people need to stop with the guns....

 

[Maskirovka]

the blair witch thing was just a joke...i guess some people can never get their head around sarcasm :\

Originally posted by Lil' Timmy
all documentaries, whether it's as obvious as moore's or not, present someone's take on reality.

i disagree...moore himself said it was comedy...which is by definition a dramatic creation, not his take on reality per-se. I think it's just an attempt to get people to think about the issue and get outraged about it...positively or negatively.

i agree, though, that it's a bit misleading. it's presented as if it were truth, when it's edited in such a way that makes what people say different than what was really said, etc. people can easily mistake that for truth (or what moore thinks is true). but that's their problem, not moore's.

Originally posted by Lil' Timmy
of course bowling for columbine is a documentary.

it's in the format of a documentary, but i wouldn't put it in the same category as a 60 minutes, dateline, or history channel documentary...i never believe anything i see in a feature length film. that's like when people think WWII movies are 100% historical fact.

and you're saying that a documentary on lions isn't someone trying to present the truth? i'm not sure that's what you meant but that's what it sounds like.

if dateline does a story about person A getting screwed over by person B for some reason, they're trying to present the facts. sure, they can put a spin on things to make it sound one way or another, but they don't go to the same lengths that moore did...editing separate things together, etc.

if dateline and 60 minutes produced things like moore and tried to pass them off as their regular investigative reporting, they'd be laughed at just like people are laughing at moore.

however, moore isn't attempting to pass his film off as something to compare to respectable newsmagazine shows. he said that it's comedy. how can you then interpret it any other way?

it's fine if you want to argue that he's a dick because he's misleading dumb people into think that it's truth...go ahead and rant about that all day. but don't accuse him of lying...that's just not the case

 

[ductonius]

Originally posted by Lil' Timmy
yeah, some people can never get their head around sarcasm. :/

What are you saying? I hope you were not trying to say anything about me, becaue such a strategy is known as "ad hominem", that is. it is a personal attack. I hope I dont need to remind you that it is quite invalid to argue in such a manner.

 

[pat_thetic]

What the heck? Did you even read the link I posted?

 

[Mechagodzilla]

"Bowling" was a satirical comedy, but the problem with it seems to be that most everyone sees it as a documentary and takes the points made too much at face value.
It got the oscar for best documentary after all, not best comedy.
It's obvious that many people don't see it as the persuasive exageration that it is, and I think that's a problem.

The comedy is so subtle and ingrained into realism that, even if the falsehoods and inventions were intentional, they weren't picked up by most of the population. Especially since it is devoid of blatant swiftian hyperbole. Things in the movie were deliberately misleading and the ideas it opposes were rendered comical through staged sequences and editing tricks.

As a way of influencing the viewer the movie is a success, but it is in no way educational or a valid collection of proofs. The point of the movie was to ridicule the various organizations that Moore objects to, but it wasn't blatant enough in its lies if you ask me. The movie is so effective in its misdirection that I'd say propaganda would be an apt descriptor.

Especially since people will buy anything. There were folks who thought Blair Witch was actual footage, just because of the documentary format. My brother being one such person.

If you ask me, the dvd should come with the counter-points on the bowlingfortruth.com site, just to prevent some misdirection.

 

[Maxi]

Originally posted by Maskirovka
if bowling for columbine is a real documentary then i guess blair witch was real too!

If it ain't a doc, then what the hell is it?!

 

[Maxi]

Originally posted by Mechagodzilla
"Bowling" was a satirical comedy, but the problem with it seems to be that most everyone sees it as a documentary and takes the points made too much at face value.
It got the oscar for best documentary after all, not best comedy.
It's obvious that many people don't see it as the persuasive exageration that it is, and I think that's a problem.

The comedy is so subtle and ingrained into realism that, even if the falsehoods and inventions were intentional, they weren't picked up by most of the population. Especially since it is devoid of blatant swiftian hyperbole. Things in the movie were deliberately misleading and the ideas it opposes were rendered comical through staged sequences and editing tricks.

As a way of influencing the viewer the movie is a success, but it is in no way educational or a valid collection of proofs. The point of the movie was to ridicule the various organizations that Moore objects to, but it wasn't blatant enough in its lies if you ask me. The movie is so effective in its misdirection that I'd say propaganda would be an apt descriptor.

Especially since people will buy anything. There were folks who thought Blair Witch was actual footage, just because of the documentary format. My brother being one such person.

If you ask me, the dvd should come with the counter-points on the bowlingfortruth.com site, just to prevent some misdirection.

....um what misdirections?

 

[Mechagodzilla]

I was talking about the ones pointed out at that site I mentioned.

Here's a link: www.bowlingfortruth.com

The site creator hates being lied to, and listed nearly every untruth in the movie with some pretty valid points. I don't really agree with the extent of his anti-moore stance, but the evidence he has is hard to ignore.

It really looks like a lot of the points in the film were exagerated for dramatic effect and to influence the viewers.

 

[el Chi]

Ok ok ok. First off - I've only read the first page because I'm lazy so apologies if I've missed the susequent drift of debate. But here goes...

Michael Moore is NOT a dumbass. He is intelligent and funny and often VERY astute. He can raise controversial issues and gets a lot of flak, the worst of which was being called an enemy of America by some. Ridiculous and, no doubt, somewhat painful. Highlighting and desiring to tackle problems with your country is not unpatriotic.

Now, in the interests of fairness: Yes he comes out with some utter crap sometimes. That comment about all the people being white cowards was stupid and ignorant - racism does work both ways, Mr. Moore. Sometimes it simply seems that he says things to cause controversy and that's simply ridiculous. I won't even mention what I've heard the title of his new film is, supposedly (although it may have been mentioned already). He makes some bullsh*t points but that needn't mean EVERYTHING he writes is crap - even Led Zeppelin/The Beatles/Jimi Hendrix/whoever else you dig made bad records. It's the same deal.

Point is: He gets too much flak and people pick up on the stupid things he says and ignore the good points he makes. Shouldn't it be the other way around?

 

[Kadayi]

Originally posted by Mechagodzilla
I was talking about the ones pointed out at that site I mentioned.

Here's a link: www.bowlingfortruth.com

The site creator hates being lied to, and listed nearly every untruth in the movie with some pretty valid points. I don't really agree with the extent of his anti-moore stance, but the evidence he has is hard to ignore.

It really looks like a lot of the points in the film were exagerated for dramatic effect and to influence the viewers.

You owe me the 15 minutes of my life that I wasted looking at that excuse for a website. :dozey:

 

[dis]

Michael Moore just pushes his own propaganda, much like the people he tends to ridicule. He's good at distorting and misrepresenting the facts so that his views are supported. He certainly doesn't present both sides of issues because he's not interested in the full truth.

 

[not28]

Thread should have been called "Unveiling a new sig, and being an attention whore."

The whole "right versus left" war makes me heave uncontrollably.