(no subject)

[nibot]

Fear, uncertainty, and doubt (and outright lies?) in Bowling for Columbine. Thanks to Alex for the link.

The point is far more fundamental: Bowling for Columbine is dishonest. It is fraudulent. It fixes upon a theme, and advances it, whenever necessary, by deception. To trash Heston, it even uses the audio/video editor to assemble a Heston speech that Heston did not give, and to turn sympathetic phrases into arrogant ones. Moore's object is not to enlighten or to document, but to play his viewer like a violin, to the point where they leave the theater with heartfelt believe in that which is, sadly, quite false.

Comments

[squarkz.livejournal.com]

although i did like bowling for columbine very much, after analyzing some of the logic later that night, i wound up feeling rather dirty. the "what a wonderful world" montage is another attempt to play the viewer into making connections between events that are not necessarily related.

i am not terribly fond of michael moore.

[easwaran.livejournal.com]

It's true. I believe it was www.smokinggun.com or something that someone showed to the Columbae list that exposed some of the falsehoods in that movie. (Apparently, the first scene where he gets a gun at the bank was totally staged. The actual bank didn't keep guns in the bank, but just gave you a certificate to go to an actual gun shop. Sorta spoils his point about "don't you think it's a bit risky to be giving out guns in a bank?")

But still, I think it was quite a good movie that pointed out good facts (I assume all the factual information was correct, even if the footage was misleading) and dealt with the issue of gun violence in some very tough ways. I see it as being like the Simpsons take on guns: fairly complex, not entirely pro or anti gun-control (after all, Canada apparently doesn't have it), but having its main point about the media creating a culture of fear, which is the actual problem with America.

[luxvesperis.livejournal.com]

Thank you for that link. I must pass it along to my friend whom I watched this with. After we left the theater, we were ranting on and on about how Moore skews facts and how he's a total hypocrite.

My position has remained the same since I saw this movie:
Its worth watching this movie because it raises some good questions but it shouldn't be taken for the complete truth. Its a total conspiracy theory. The scary thing is that most of America simply ate it all up. They're hungry for a reason to protest to scream to be righteous. Even me saying this is in that same spirit.

Its incredible how careful I am choosing the words to discuss this film. Its not that I completely disagree with him. But many times in the movie I can't tell what the hell he's trying to say. After a while my head just started to hurt.

And after the Oscars, I was simply disgusted. Yes, freedom of speech and all that. But have some respect. For the Oscars, for the other people there, for the spirit of the ceremony itself.

Okay, I should stop before I start ranting even more.

[baseballump.livejournal.com]

Although I do not agree with all of Mr. Moore's ideas, I do share his resentment towards the war. Note, this is not anti-American thinking; it is anti-war thinking. If you wnat to get rid of the dictator, make him watch 'Big Brother' or something.
About the Oscars: What is more disrespectful, talking about the war (come on, it's not like it's a big secret, with all the security around the building...), or to stand there and say things like "I wanna thank my dog for being so furry, and I wanna thank my post office for delivering my mail, and I wanna thank my mom for baking cookies, etc. etc."?
Long and lame acceptance speeches are REALLY disrespectful to people watching and to TV networks that pay big money to broadcast the thing. We need more acceptance speeches with a meaning!

I haven't seem "Bowling for Columbine" yet, but I will. I will apply lots of critical thinking before I accept Mr. Moore's ideas, and I will probably agree that he's a hypocrite. Nonetheless, he has some good ideas.

Guns don't kill Americans, Americans kill Americans.
If you need to shoot someone because you failed a test, you shouldn't be allowed to handle a gun.
Gun control is not the answer, intelligent behavior is the answer.

[baseballump.livejournal.com]

I found this: http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/wackoattacko/
It seems like most of the things brought up on the web page you're referring to are false, and are just efforts to take away the focus on the real question: Why do Americans need to bring guns everywhere, for example to baseball games, where shooting someone in the parking lot after the game seemed like a normal thing to do?
Sure, not everything Michael Moore says is true (everyone lies from time to time), but how about telling people about the real lies by Moore instead of making up new 'lies'?