Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater What's your Movie/Music Ratio?

This is the general problem I have with Moore. I agree with his message for the most part. But after Bowling for Columbine, and now Fahrenheit 911, I can't consider his work to be documentary. It's really satire more than documentary. He knowingly and purposefully twists the truth around to make his message stronger and more clear. Which is fine, but not fine in the name of documentary. Both movies raise a lot of good questions and should be watched and evaluated on an individual level. I just wish that he was more honest.

Moore's lack of "honesty" tends to make his message less "credible" in my mind too. But, in the end, he's trying to get a message across. If he were to tell a bland, cold documentarian style story regarding these issues, (1) they wouldn't be as controversial, which is the true life blood of his work, and (2) people woudl be bored to tears, and never go see his movies again. I think that it is a testament to his work that he can make people (a) laugh, (b) think and (c) make a point. Whether I agree with his views all the time are another issue. Whether I wish that he toned things down more so that his "good" messages coudl be taken more seriously - again, that's a different issue.

On the whole, Moore's style has made him a household name, and maybe the only documentarian (used however loosely as you prefer) that people can name without too much thought.

In reply to:

---

Moore's lack of "honesty" tends to make his message less "credible" in my mind too. But, in the end, he's trying to get a message across.

---

So it's OK to lie in order to make your point that the president is a liar? It's wrong to lie when you're trying to round up allies in the war against terror, but it's OK to lie when you're trying to influence the presidential election?

In reply to:

---

Moore's style has made him a household name, and maybe the only documentarian (used however loosely as you prefer) that people can name without too much thought.

---

Moore is NOT a documentarian. Even he calls "Farenheit 9/11" an op-ed piece.

Mark

Mark

Your points are well made (and well recieved).

I was not trying to imply that lying is acceptable in his field. To the contrary, I wish that he "lied" or stretched the truth, or did whatever he does, in a more straighforward way, that didn't make it seem like he was hiding the ball or leaving something important out of the picture. If he were more able to be so one-sided, and more able to give credit where it is due, he would have a lot more credibility. I find his points harder to believe (even when they are true) BECAUSE of the fact that he stretches and distorts the truth so often otherwise. My point is that, if he is correct, then he shouldn't need to lie. But he does, which, in my mind, weakens his position.

And Documentarian or not (with or without qualifiers), Moore's movies are not shy about the fact that he has an agenda. The marketing, his comentary, hsi well publicizes political views - all of these acknowlegde the truth that these are op-ed pieces. I guess I was trying to say that, above all else, Moore is a capitalist. He's trying to make money. Without his "slant," his movies would be boring drivel, and the masses would not be attending in droves (or discussing it in off topic forums via the www)

In the end - Moore is not my favorite. I don't, in fact, agree with a lot of his politics. I don't agree with his ambush style of geurilla movie making. But, he makes me laugh, that donut eating fatso! And he makes me think, which is more than can be said for most summer movie fare

Interesting reference. What I like about it and Michael Moore's movie is that this all gets us asking questions about things we wouldn't be asking about otherwise.

I would like to raise the issue of how we determine what is truth. In both the case of Farenhiet 9/11 and this expose, most of what we are dealing with is conclusiory in nature rather than purely factual. The line between what is fact and what is conclusion is often quite indistinct.

A few years ago I had to research this issue from a legal standpoint. In California, when involved in a legal action you have the right in most cases to ask the judge for detailed written findings for review by a higher court. These used to to be called Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Several years ago this was changed to be called simply a Statement of Decision. I think the older nomenclature was better because it was more distinct and therefore clear. Why did this matter? Because an appellate court generally does not review findings of fact which a trial court is in a better position to determine. Rather the appellate court review for errors in conclusions or application of law. The problem is in many cases what is a factual finding is a conclusion which overlaps quite significantly with a conslusion of law. Your case may hinge upon such distinctions.

When we start looking at what are lies or truths we are generally making conclusions first about what are facts and what signifigance we give to facts which may be only conclusions based on facts which are themselves only conclusions.

What I find in these discussions is that we all generally have already formed some level of conclusion and are looking for "facts" to support our earlier conclusions. So if you don't like G.W.Bush and his policies you tend to conclude Michael Moore has done a good job on exposing him. If you like G.W.Bush and his policies you tend to dislike M. Moore and his enrertaining propaganda and want to see it exposed as lies.

Personally I don't find Farenheit 9/11 or the exposure of Michael Moore's lies factual. Both appear as propagation of certain viewpoints with very selective use of "facts", themselves often comprised of many conclusions.

Is either of these viewpoints the truth? Not to my mind. For me the truth derives from considering all these efforts to support a viewpoint, adding my own efforts to muster facts, synthesizing a theory of reality and observing further, whether my theory has much predictive value upon which I may base my actions.

A large engrossing task that is never done. I am thankful that others do so much work to provide me fodder from which to work.

wow! talk about someone serious about screen realestate for your computer... you got to be a programmer or graphics person. call me impressed!
I'm currently 80/movie 20/music. I listen to most of my CDs in my car. sorry to say that a lot of my rock CDs sound better in my car...it's weird I know -- but it's a fact!

In reply to:

---

I guess I was trying to say that, above all else, Moore is a capitalist. He's trying to make money.

---

You've hit the nail on the head. Though he tries to make us believe that all of the world's problems are caused by white male capitalists, Moore is an unabashed white male capitalist! This level of hypocrisy disgusts me, and I refuse to contribute a nickel of my hard earned money to Michael Moore's pockets.

Mark

so tell us how you REALLY feel, mark!!

bigjohn

Hey bigjohn! How come when I said that I got yelled at, but mhorgel says it and gets frickin' happy faces?

Doctor Knows Best.