And the winner of the best film award at the Cannes festival is ...

by Simon 103 Replies latest social entertainment

• 

  little witch

  J. Coustaue (pardon my spelling) spent his life truly devoted to the sea. He risked his life to bring visual experience to the masses in order to educate and enlighten us all with the reality of the ocean floor! A scientific achievment on film the likes of which has to this day to be documented!

  How this compares to politically motivated, showmanship is beyond me. I am insulted that Michael Moore was compared to such a devoted, involved, and talented champion of a worthy cause.

  MM is in league with the O'Reilly's, Limbaughs, Donahues, Bushes and Kerry's of the world....Anything to get political sway and votes. I am quite unhappy with the whole commercial aspect and find it all irrelevant and petty.
• 

  talesin

  LW

  How could anyone compare Moore to Cousteau? That's nuts. You are so right. I must have missed that. Was that in the article? I'm glad you pointed it out.

  He deserves criticism, that is true. I just don't find he mongers hatred against groups such as some of the others mentioned. I don't disagree with your earlier points, which is why I edited my comment to direct it to the comparison of Moore to Limbaugh, although I do find the O'Reilly comparison much more valid.

  tal
• 

  SixofNine

  How this compares to politically motivated, showmanship is beyond me. I am insulted that Michael Moore was compared to such a devoted, involved, and talented champion of a worthy cause.

  Well it wasn't compared. However, I daresay that at least for the times we are living in, Farenheit 911 takes on a cause every bit as worthy as anything done by monsieur Cousteau.
• 

  little witch

  Tales,

  My comments were on the original article that Simon posted (MSN I think) stating that the only other winner in the class was J>C.

  What a friggin decline! There is just no comparison in my mind....

  Talent has taken a back seat to politics in documentaries as well as the definition of a documentary, and it's purpose. How a loud mouthed, politically polarized,POLITICALLY MOTIVATED "documentary" got compared to the lifelong, passionate work of Coustaue is just beyond me....
• 

  Big Tex

  I hope this is better than "Bowling for Columbine".

  I watched that, and although I agree with the sentiments, I found myself getting angry over the obvious manipulation. What happened at that school was a tragedy and I felt manipulated in a condescending way into accepting Michael Mooore's version of "truth". I don't know, maybe it's my JW experience speaking, but I detest having someone preach to me their own spin on events.

  I haven't seen this film, nor have I read much about it outside of the basic headlines. I truly hope this film is more substance than hype.
• 

  little witch

  Big Tex,

  Thankyou for saying it better than I did.

  Documentary Independant films used to mean something. They were facts and truthful, true events captured on film for our education. That is the difference that I was trying to get across....

  A documentary (to me) means a filming of true and current events devoid of opinion and innuendo. That has been at the root of my comments. Obviously my meaning of a documentary is not the same as others.
• 

  talesin

  What a friggin decline! There is just no comparison in my mind....

  Talent has taken a back seat to politics in documentaries as well as the definition of a documentary, and it's purpose. How a loud mouthed, politically polarized,POLITICALLY MOTIVATED "documentary" got compared to the lifelong, passionate work of Coustaue is just beyond me....

  I wholeheartedly agree. Although like Big Tex I may agree with his sentiments, he goes about it the wrong way, therefore negating any positive effect he could have made if he was more honest and less sensational. Unfortunately, all he accomplishes is a clouding of the issues. My only point was, that he does not incite hatred of gays, blacks, women, etc. as Limbaugh does. I guess I was not clear enough in my original post.

  There is NO comparison between him and Cousteau. Cousteau was a scientist, who educated us about the environment with FACTS as you say. I have always admired him greatly, and I don't like the comparison at ALL.

  tal
• 

  little witch

  He goes about it in the wrong way....yes...

  And IMO attempting to "hijack" an entire genre of film. A documentary should be devoid of opinion. A documentary is simply a visual sharing of factual events.

  I feel the very definition of "documentary films" have now changed, probobly for the worst.

  It is no secret that many awards (Oscars, Tony's, Emmy's) are politically influenced and commercially influenced. It is a sad day that those who oppose the Hollywood machine are blinded by the same snare. On the losing end are those great minds that actually are involved in passionate causes.

  Instead, overweight hollywood camera hams dominate.....sigh...

  I am with ya Tales.
• 

  avishai

  He pursued issues and as a side affect became famous. Many of the republican showman were professionals who secure their careers by sensationalizing the conservative perspective

  What? What's the difference?

  The republican showmen did'nt start out ANY different. They did'nt start famous either. They pursued issues, and THEN became famous. Same thing. Also, I tink in most cases that fame has corrupted or blinded all of them. Rush, for instance, started as much more of a moderate, ripping into BOTH sides of the spectrum, more than now, anyway. I think they both, moore and limbaugh, started to believe their own PR. They're both liars. Degree or difference in agenda does'nt matter. It's just which side you happen to be on that blinds.

  They BOTH disgust me. Hypocrites.

  Saducees and Pharisees were on opposite sides of the political spectrum. Conservative and liberal. Jesus said they both sucked. Same with these guys.
• 

  little witch

  I also have a comment and question for Simon who made this thread.

  Simon,

  You make no bones about how you feel that the US dominates the worlds politics, movies, music, culture,and ideas. This is something that has long bothered you, and you have posted alot in that vein. I happen to agree that this is true.

  Now I am wondering why you have chosen, out of all the movies critiqued at the international venue that is Cannes, to glorify a disfunctional and unworthy nominee.

  I suggest that you have been influenced by the very machine that you have condemned in the past. It is my thought that in the same way you were hood-winked(and your family) by an american anomoly religion, you are now embrassing another american attempt at control.

  I urge you to do study on commercial advertising and how we as a society are influenced to buy, buy buy....Why are we so enamered of "musicians" who cannot play an instrument? What is manufactured and what is real talent?

  Please ask yourself if you are influenced by commercialism and repetedive advertisments. I say so out of care.

  Sixy,

  Yes IMO it was compared..."not since J. C.'s film"....compared it.