06-18-2007, 09:44 AM
(This post was last modified: 06-18-2007, 10:27 AM by Hammerskjold.)
>No indeed, when a few thousand people are killed it is ...well just war.....but at the moment somebody cathes a grieving family member on tape it is distasteful? Give me a break.
No 'amigo', catching it on tape is not what I found distasteful. Using it and the people for your own purpose and agenda, that's what I find distasteful. The same way I find neo-cons beating the drums of sham patriotism to support their own agenda to be distasteful. Moore is arguably a talented film-maker. But a documentarian? I can't really see that classification apply to him lately.
>Again, all those snapshots you are mentioning here didn't make me think that e.g. Wolfowitz is puttiung saliva in his hair 4 times a day.
Wolfowitz combing practices should not be the focus. That was my point. Wolfowitz is a shady guy to me not because of his grooming habits. Showing that clip distracts that fact, but it sure ratchets up the 'hey let's hate on this guy because he does that gross thing with his hair'. But it can score easy hate points. Might as well put a devils horn on him and provide the baskets of rotten tomatoes. Do you understand that?
You must have some clue since you were the one that said it's easy to think of the 2 columbine shooters as some sort of satanic spawns out to kill good folks, yes?
>Anti Moore advocates lost the 'he hates America' argument, and now they try to say that film technicaly speaking his documentary is more a movie, and so very confusing....please.....
Now's my turn to say puh-lease. Did you read Moore's -own- writings and comments? He himself alternates between calling it an exercise in first amendment and journalism and documentary, only to say it's just a movie when it's convenient for him. Or are you going to wait for the movie\documentary of his writings to come out?
So which is it Eppie, how should I view Moore's recent work, since you seem to be quite generous with your pithy observations and Yodaisms. Should I question some scenes like you say because only a moron would buy the whole thing, unexamined with no critical analysis? It is after all, just a movie.
Or should I agree with any and every conclusion Moore comes up with, because it's a documentary, and all documentaries are 100% truth. It's easier than reading some 800 pages of reports after all.
Help me out here Eppie! I don't know how to make up my mind, how does -your- mind juggle the inconsistencies of calling it 'just a movie', then switching to it's a documentary chock full of truth? Oh how will I go on about my life now?! Help me Eppie Wan Kenobi, you're my only hope!
Actually I'm kidding, don't worry about it, thanks to you I already made up my mind that you are correct in your first self-diagnosis. And I bow to your superior mental inadequecies. Have a beer on me. (bill it to M. Moore.)
edited ps. I can't believe I didn't think of this sooner. Showing the same work on 2 screens simultaneously is the answer. I'll simply label one screen 'movie', and the other 'documentary'. If there's something that I need to take at face value, I'll look at the the 'documentary' screen. If I need to see something as just a movie and therefore not to be taken as gospel literal truth, I'll look at the 'movie' screen. Problem solved.
No 'amigo', catching it on tape is not what I found distasteful. Using it and the people for your own purpose and agenda, that's what I find distasteful. The same way I find neo-cons beating the drums of sham patriotism to support their own agenda to be distasteful. Moore is arguably a talented film-maker. But a documentarian? I can't really see that classification apply to him lately.
>Again, all those snapshots you are mentioning here didn't make me think that e.g. Wolfowitz is puttiung saliva in his hair 4 times a day.
Wolfowitz combing practices should not be the focus. That was my point. Wolfowitz is a shady guy to me not because of his grooming habits. Showing that clip distracts that fact, but it sure ratchets up the 'hey let's hate on this guy because he does that gross thing with his hair'. But it can score easy hate points. Might as well put a devils horn on him and provide the baskets of rotten tomatoes. Do you understand that?
You must have some clue since you were the one that said it's easy to think of the 2 columbine shooters as some sort of satanic spawns out to kill good folks, yes?
>Anti Moore advocates lost the 'he hates America' argument, and now they try to say that film technicaly speaking his documentary is more a movie, and so very confusing....please.....
Now's my turn to say puh-lease. Did you read Moore's -own- writings and comments? He himself alternates between calling it an exercise in first amendment and journalism and documentary, only to say it's just a movie when it's convenient for him. Or are you going to wait for the movie\documentary of his writings to come out?
So which is it Eppie, how should I view Moore's recent work, since you seem to be quite generous with your pithy observations and Yodaisms. Should I question some scenes like you say because only a moron would buy the whole thing, unexamined with no critical analysis? It is after all, just a movie.
Or should I agree with any and every conclusion Moore comes up with, because it's a documentary, and all documentaries are 100% truth. It's easier than reading some 800 pages of reports after all.
Help me out here Eppie! I don't know how to make up my mind, how does -your- mind juggle the inconsistencies of calling it 'just a movie', then switching to it's a documentary chock full of truth? Oh how will I go on about my life now?! Help me Eppie Wan Kenobi, you're my only hope!
Actually I'm kidding, don't worry about it, thanks to you I already made up my mind that you are correct in your first self-diagnosis. And I bow to your superior mental inadequecies. Have a beer on me. (bill it to M. Moore.)
edited ps. I can't believe I didn't think of this sooner. Showing the same work on 2 screens simultaneously is the answer. I'll simply label one screen 'movie', and the other 'documentary'. If there's something that I need to take at face value, I'll look at the the 'documentary' screen. If I need to see something as just a movie and therefore not to be taken as gospel literal truth, I'll look at the 'movie' screen. Problem solved.