hrm, tho i haven't seen the movie, i don't see what's so bad about the article. it's true, and it was true for bowling for columbine. he's trying to make his point, so you really can't hold it against him, but he's been known to bend and stretch things to make them more persuasive.
i guess what i feel is the bottom line is that you shouldn't feel like you know all the facts after you walk out of there, because you know how obviously biased he is, and would have been during the production of the film.
but that's just how i felt about bowling for columbine, as well.. And Roger & Me, but not as much for some reason
obviously michael moore is biased towards his point of view of things. everyone is.
and the american government not only bend and stretch things to persuade the american people and other nations who they are allied with, but flat out lie and coverup and ignore.
so although michael moore adds a bunch of cinematic effect to what messages hes trying to portray; dramatic music, shocking visuals - hes still backing up what hes saying with a lot of facts.. of course the deliverance of these facts needs to be through mediums which will be able to reach and affect people... so many of us are completely desensitized or else brainwashed into believing the news on tv is THE NEWS, when so much is left out.
but anyways, this is just a stupid livejournal post with a link to an article in the paper that i didnt appreciate.. i actually just put it there to make someone who might not have noticed it in the windsor star aware..
yeah, totally understandable... it's just sad that one has to take everything one sees on the news or in a documentary film with the proverbial grain of salt.
I'm sure micheal moore ignored quite a few facts that could have taken away from his point, but who wouldn't have done that being in his given position. I don't agree with the government lieing, covering up, or ignoring, and I know it's not on par with the lieing, covering up, and ignoring that Micheal Moore did. But at least he admits to it, which gives him some cred in my book :)
I have to agree with Hayley here. I don't think the article is that bad, it's just the argument to Michael Moore's side of things. Though I don't see why people can keep pointing out that Bush captured Sadam when it's been shown that there was no connection between him and 9/11 and that there were no weapons of mass destruction found.
and we are all ignorantyoudontlovemeJune 29 2004, 10:47:42 UTC
articles that argue michael moores side of things work against the message he is trying to portray and that is that civilians on both sides were killed for no good reason other than for oil and money.
Re: and we are all ignorantcaseynovaJune 29 2004, 12:54:01 UTC
your right, that is a fact, but there is so much that has happened that you can't wrap up the entirety of it in that one statement. Besides the point that that is far from the only message michael moore has. All I'm saying is that everyone can have their own opinion and should make there own choices. I think the article serves it's purpose. It does work against the message that Moore is trying to portray, and that is a good thing, it lets people see both sides of the argument and then decide for themselves. Following either side without hearing both sides makes you a sheep.
Re: and we are all ignorantyoudontlovemeJune 29 2004, 17:48:34 UTC
its true casey, that everyone should have their own opinion... but when the government of a country is lying about a war they went ahead with, that was protested all around the world, and that NATO wouldnt back up - because of a so called terrorist threat, and then go on to say that they have LIBERATED a country , when all they did was kill a bunch of civilians for no god damned reason ----- that should all be exposed and then people should make up their own opinions..
the guy who wrote that article was speaking as if michael moores movie was a complete fabrication , even though he never saw it.. the guy was basically saying: lies!! all lies!! bush did good! god bless bush for striking down the enemy who was jealous of our FREEDOM
"Now, let me stipulate that I have not seen this movie. I wasn't invited to the screenings, but I have read the advance articles, and I went to Moore's website and watched the trailer."
I think I just heard someone's arguement going out the window!
and gee his argument is just a broken record of what the american government keeps trying to hold up..
but the facts ? the bush family has always been closely tied to the bin laden family and the saudi prince bandar.. and there is a shitload of money that is invested
Comments 17
Reply
i guess what i feel is the bottom line is that you shouldn't feel like you know all the facts after you walk out of there, because you know how obviously biased he is, and would have been during the production of the film.
but that's just how i felt about bowling for columbine, as well..
And Roger & Me, but not as much for some reason
Reply
and the american government not only bend and stretch things to persuade the american people and other nations who they are allied with, but flat out lie and coverup and ignore.
so although michael moore adds a bunch of cinematic effect to what messages hes trying to portray; dramatic music, shocking visuals - hes still backing up what hes saying with a lot of facts.. of course the deliverance of these facts needs to be through mediums which will be able to reach and affect people... so many of us are completely desensitized or else brainwashed into believing the news on tv is THE NEWS, when so much is left out.
but anyways, this is just a stupid livejournal post with a link to an article in the paper that i didnt appreciate.. i actually just put it there to make someone who might not have noticed it in the windsor star aware..
Reply
I'm sure micheal moore ignored quite a few facts that could have taken away from his point, but who wouldn't have done that being in his given position. I don't agree with the government lieing, covering up, or ignoring, and I know it's not on par with the lieing, covering up, and ignoring that Micheal Moore did. But at least he admits to it, which gives him some cred in my book :)
Reply
what does michael moore stand to gain by ignoring the opposition (to his argument) ?
Reply
Reply
that is a fact.
Reply
Reply
but when the government of a country is lying about a war they went ahead with, that was protested all around the world, and that NATO wouldnt back up - because of a so called terrorist threat, and then go on to say that they have LIBERATED a country , when all they did was kill a bunch of civilians for no god damned reason ----- that should all be exposed and then people should make up their own opinions..
the guy who wrote that article was speaking as if michael moores movie was a complete fabrication , even though he never saw it.. the guy was basically saying: lies!! all lies!! bush did good! god bless bush for striking down the enemy who was jealous of our FREEDOM
whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat????????????????????
Reply
I think I just heard someone's arguement going out the window!
Reply
and gee his argument is just a broken record of what the american government keeps trying to hold up..
but the facts ? the bush family has always been closely tied to the bin laden family and the saudi prince bandar.. and there is a shitload of money that is invested
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment