Think the RW is all in a tizzy now (F911)...

[Kazak]

Just wait until it wins all of it's awards. :D

[Dob Bole]

1. Bah, Humbug!

Stupid librul media awards...

[BigDaddyLove]

2. I wonder if the Academy will give the Oscar.........

this time for 'Best Documentary' after all the hubbub generated by BFC's win last year.

Hopefully an actual documentary will win the award this time around.

[Bluebear]

3. There's talk it could be nominated for Best Picture

[BigDaddyLove]

6. Now that I can agree with.............

.

[Bandit]

4. You sound like you don't feel Moore documented these things accurately

I think from all I have heard, I have not seen the movie, that everything was documented in very fine detail. Not much except Moore's opinions could be found in fault. If you feel he hasn't documented everything he has shown maybe you could enlighten us.

[BigDaddyLove]

5. Nope............

Not what I said.

I just don't think Michael Moore makes documentaries, he makes lengthy Op-ed pieces, therefore I didn't agree that BFC should have won an Oscar for Best Documentary, just as I wouldn't agree if F911 won.

[Bandit]

9. IMO everything in the movie is documented

What is your definition of a documentary? Believe it or not Documentaries are allowed to express opinion. They all do. Every single one ever made. As long as it is all documented it is a documentary.

[BigDaddyLove]

14. Apparently documentaries are allowed to express an opinion....

and I am not.

Sorry to invade the love-in.

[emulatorloo]

26. You can express an opinion, but I don't think you know much about the

history or form of documentaries. . .

[emulatorloo]

23. All documentaries aim to inform and persuade. . .

and Moore's fits right in with that. . .

Don't get your point.

[BigDaddyLove]

31. You don't have to get my point..........

I just tend to think of films like 'Dark Days' and 'American Dream' and 'Brother's Keeper' and 'Titicut Follies' and 'Salesman' as documentaries, while films like 'BFC' and 'Roger and Me' and 'F911' as Op-ed pieces.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

33. You're not making a point.

[BigDaddyLove]

35. Thanks for your insight..........

.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

40. It was quick and right to the point, wasn't it?...

Does that bother you?

Too bad.

[BigDaddyLove]

43. No actually it doesn't bother me in and of itself........

but what does bother me is the needless attitude simply because you don't agree with me.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

46. "Needless attitude"?? Interesting response to a post that doesn't...

...bother you.

[BigDaddyLove]

51. You just seem to want to piss me off.........

and start an argument.

If you don't like what I say or think then just put me on ignore.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

56. "Piss you off"? Let's see, your first post was #2, and my first post....

...was #33. Not only does it look like YOU deliberately started the argument, it also looks like several other people got to you before I did.

[emulatorloo]

39. I don't think that's a distinction most historians would make

Titicut Follies makes as much of an argument as F911, don't you think? I understand that the technique is different, but it is still edited, there were choices about what to shoot, and Wiseman was making an argument w his film as much as Moore.

It is more a matter of style than anything else. . .Cinema Verite may seem more 'transparent' to you, but it is just as structured.

[BigDaddyLove]

47. Please don't pull the 'film historian' thing on me........

I've actually worked on (small) documentaries, and I understand their structure.

I just disagree with the prevailing opinion that Moore's films are documentaries. The moment that an attempt is made to editorialize, it ceases to become a documentary and turns into an infomercial.

[emulatorloo]

54. Delete the word "Film Historian" and re-read my post then

if the words 'film historian' bother you. . .because my point doesn't depend on those words. . .my point is your def of documentary as some kind of "objective" presentation doesn't hold up.

Wisemen made just as many decisions about what to show and in what order to show them as Michael Moore did. Maybe your objection is that Michael Moore inserts himself into the events? To me that makes the documentary more "honest" as it clearly lets the audience know that there is a point-of-view being expressed.

[BigDaddyLove]

58. We are just going to have to disagree.........

To me, overtly inserting oneself into a documentary in order to make the viewer aware of a certain point of view is the kiss of death to whatever the word 'documentary' means.

[emulatorloo]

68. Ok then - we'll disagree!

I get your point. . .

But you are WRONG!!! ;-)

(Hey, at least I don't think you are a Freeper!) Good luck in the rest of the thread! :toast:

[DenverDem]

7. Your comments are merely politics of personal attack.

No facts, just spin.

[BigDaddyLove]

8. My comments are my opinion..........

never meant to be put forth as fact.

Try again.

[DenverDem]

10. You read the manual well.

Hope you're having a good time.

[BigDaddyLove]

12. What the fuck are you talking about?

.

[Cheswick2.0]

11. His movie is a documentary...........

despite your right wing inspired talking points. He presents the information, it is all documented.

[BigDaddyLove]

13. In your opinion it is.........

in mine it's not.

[TheWatcher]

15. The FACTS Do not Support Your Opinion.

But you are welcome to remain blind.

Come November neither you or your "opinion" will be relevant.

[BigDaddyLove]

You are going to have to clarify where my opinion..........

has anything to do with what happens in November for me to see where I am 'remaining blind.'

While you are at it, please point out what I am remaining blind to.

[TheWatcher]

18. Oh No, YOU are the one crowing about The Facts

Please, share them with us, "the unenlightened".

Come on, Big Daddy.

Educate us.

[BigDaddyLove]

20. Again, I think you've confused me with someone else.......

either that, or you're just an idiot looking for a fight.

I never disputed the facts of the film.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

36. No, we know EXACTLY who you are....

...and you're the poster that's trying to pick a fight.

[BigDaddyLove]

37. You think so?

Why is that exactly?

Just because you don't agree with my opinions of Michael Moore's films?

[Media_Lies_Daily]

42. Yep, I do. Problem?

[BigDaddyLove]

48. The 'problem' seems to be yours.....

not mine.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

50. Right. You're correct and everyone else is wrong. Interesting.

[BigDaddyLove]

52. Hardly......

I have an opinion, so do you....no-one is right or wrong.

Big fucking deal.

[TheWatcher]

16. But While we're at it.....

Since you seem to have so much grasp of what the FACTS are, why don't you kindly list ALL of the discrepancies and falsehoods from the Movie, and back them up with your talking poi, um, I mena the REAL FACTS.....

We're waiting.....

[BigDaddyLove]

19. You'll have to keep waiting I guess..........

if you're looking for me to somehow 'disprove' the facts in F911; either that or read a little more slowly.

I never said his facts are in question, I just said that his films in my opinion aren't really documentaries.

[TheWatcher]

21. Then how is it not a documentery?

Enlighten us.

[BigDaddyLove]

27. In some ways it is..........

in that it deals with a non-fiction subject, but (IN MY OPINION) a true, documentary allows you to make your own mind up about a situation by presenting said situation without opinionated editorial content.

For example, BFC beat Spellbound for the Best Documentary award at the Oscars....BFC was in this case a better film (AGAIN MY OPINION), but Spellbound was a better documentary.

[LibertyorDeath]

34. If you can't or won't elaborate on this

"his films in my opinion aren't really documentaries"
Then your "opinion" in my opinion is not really an opinion it's bogus.

What do you base your opinion on.

His editing style. (is superb)

The way he transitions the story ( excellent IMO)

The shear volume of facts

The way he sticks the truth in peoples faces & films their
reactions.

The way he lets the people in the Documentary speak for themselves
express their own opinions

What exactly disqualifies it as a Doc

If it helps he could redo his voice over in a Serious British accent
and stick a BBC 2 production logo at the end of the credits.

[Enraged_Ape]

17. You don't seem to have a good grasp on what you're arguing.

That's just my opinion.

What is your point about this movie?

[BigDaddyLove]

22. Jesus Christ.........

My only point is that I don't view Michael Moore as a documentarian, nor do I view his films as documentaries.

That's all.....nothing sinister.

[CatWoman]

24. you rang?

[BigDaddyLove]

28. Finally.........

Where 'ya been?

[TheWatcher]

25. But you have yet to elaborate how it is not.

Examples please.

If you are going to go to this much trouble to make a point, then point out in detail how it is not a documentary.

[TheWatcher]

29. That's what I thought.

You have a point, but no examples, facts, or statements that would actually lend support to the point or opinion being factual in nature.

Thank You For Playing.

I'm done with you.

[Enraged_Ape]

30. So, what, in your opinion, is a documentary? Security cam footage?

I can't think of anything more objective than that.

[BigDaddyLove]

32. Forget it........

.

[Enraged_Ape]

66. BigDaddy, we love you, but EVERY documentary has a spin.

There hasn't been a single documentary ever made that doesn't (except for security camera footage).

The cinematographer puts his point of view in every shot, the editor puts his point of view in every edit, and the director puts his point of view in EVERYTHING. It's been that way throughout motion picture history; and in the end, it's all in what they show you, and how you interpret it, that gives a documentary its ultimate meaning.

For the last four years, FOX, CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, MSRNC, and all their ilk have spoon-fed us one side of the story. In just two hours, Michael Moore gives us the other side. Decide for yourself which makes more sense to you. I know which story makes more sense to me.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

38. So, are you saying that you know more about documentaries...

...than the people that voted to give Moore an Oscar??

Wow. You certainly appear to have a rather large ego.

[BigDaddyLove]

41. Do you agree with everything that happens.........

in the world, or do you sometimes find yourself at odds with a decision?

[Media_Lies_Daily]

44. You're in a much better position to discuss this...

...since you're the one that's at odds with pretty much everyone in this thread.

So, tell us how you feel.

[no name no slogan]

45. For Allah's sake everybody

Get off BDL's ass already! He simply stated that he doesn't think Moore's movies are documentaries-- a point which could be argued by many people that know how he's edited some of his past pictures.

Give it up already-- the man stated his opinion, and backed it up a couple times. There is no blood on the water. Please go back into the ocean. Fcukinghellalready....

We now return to our regularly scheduled bitchfest.

:eyes:

[Media_Lies_Daily]

49. How Moore edited his films in the past has nothing to do with how...

...he edited F911. If I were a betting man, I'd say that Moore has learned quite a bit since his earlier films.

If you have some proof that Moore is doctoring the film or somehow creating falsehoods, post it here anytime you're ready.

In the meantime, try not lecturing your fellow posters about what they should or should not be posting. If you don't like the thread, don't read it.

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

59. Well, well, well. Looks like you get pretty wound up...

...when you're backed into a corner of your own making.

When are you going to post all of the areas in F911 where you believe Moore has been dishonest, unfair, or where video has been deliberately edited to only show a certain point of view?

That's a pretty straight-forward request, and I'm not the only one that's asked you this question.

Since you have yet to answer that question, is it safe to assume that you don't have any documentation to prove your point?

[BigDaddyLove]

61. Look..........

How about you point out to me where I've ever said that Moore has been 'dishonest, unfair or that his films are deliberately edited to only show a point of view', in any one of my posts in this thread (or anywhere else for that matter).

I have never said any of the above with regard to any of Michael Moore's films, or T.V. shows or books, and as such I can only assume that you haven't read anything I've written, or are confusing me with someone else.

You seem Hell-bent on getting me to defend a position that is not my own, and it's getting terribly old at this point.

[no name no slogan]

62. The thread's fine, but mobthink is not-- especially by so-called Democrats

How Moore edited his films in the past has nothing to do with how he edited F911

WTF? How can you make such a statement? Did you believe GW when he said Iraq had WMD, although he has a history of lying and stealing to get his way?

Like I stated, Moore has done some things in the past that make me take everything else he's done with a grain of salt. If you know somebody who has a reputation for fudging things, does that mean you believe everything s/he says as the gospel truth without checking it out? Of course not!

Does that mean that I don't enjoy or respect his work? Hardly. I saw F911 at 5:00, the first show of the day yesterday in my town. It was an excellent film, and I didn't find anything factually wrong with it myself. However, I've not poured over it with a fine-tooth comb yet, so I don't know for sure.

If I did find one or two inaccuracies, would it affect how I feel about the film? I doubt it. Roger & Me is STILL one of my all-time favorite films, and I know there's some things in there that were taken out of chronological order. I also own all the episodes of TV Nation and The Awful Truth, and watch them regularly, too-- I'm hardly a passive fan. If indeed there are a couple things that are a little questionable, I know that the basic premise is sound and that Moore gets it right more often than not.

In the meantime, try not lecturing your fellow posters about what they should or should not be posting

Gee, thanks dad. That sure set me straight. Who's lecturing who here? I'm certainly not "lecturing" anybody. I simply stated that you kids are sure enjoying your little circular firing squad here, especially over a fairly benign comment. Cripes, you'd think this was GD:2004 in February the way you folks are carrying on about this.

But apparently it's more fun to eat one of our own than to give him the benefit of the doubt, and agree to disagree on such a trivial matter.

[BigDaddyLove]

53. Thank you........

I'm glad at least one person is at least reading what I've been posting.

[no name no slogan]

63. No probs bro

I'm still trying to understand what the big deal is in pointing out Moore's past history. Jeezus, you'd think you'd pooped on the Pope with the reactions of some people. Mobthink sucks, no matter who does it.

[BigDaddyLove]

64. I don't mind being challenged on an opinion........

but being forced to defend a position that I don't hold is sorta ridiculous.

On the other hand, it is amusing reading some of the things I'm accused of saying.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

57. Documentary, Schmockumentary

The movie was great cuz he lambasted a target that needs to be lambasted...

I viewed the movie as in indictment of Bush....

In a legal indictment you only include inculpatory information...

Of course the movie lacked nuance; it was intended to expose the mendacity of the Bush cabal not present a history of how America and Iraq ended up at war...

[BigDaddyLove]

60. Absolutely right on.........

It's a great film.

[ContinentalOp]

67. A Documentary is a Non-Fiction Film, end of story.

Your idea of what constitutes a documentary is absolutely absurd. Well to be more kind I can understand your confusion but your definition of a documentary is simply incorrect. Documentaries are typically defined as any non-fiction film. In fact I believe many awards actually refer to the category as "non-fiction" rather than documentary. This in no way disqualifies films that editorialize just as you wouldn't categorize a newspaper editorial as fiction. You seem to be confusing the general categories of fiction vs. nonfiction with the journalism field's distinction between news and editorial.

Ironically if you frequent DU you should be aware that even this distinction is blurry at best. As we all know most news outlets editorialize every story they run through the framing (headlines, where the story is placed, etc.) or through omission (which facts and viewpoints are communicated and which are left out).

[Renew Deal]

65. It will be up next year

Not this year.