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

by Simon 103 Replies latest social entertainment

  • talesin
    talesin
    talesin, a "mockumentary" would be something like Spinal Tap.

    Six

    Yes, I see your point. He walks a very fine line. But I do think, that he does not produce documentaries in the strictest sense. How should his films be categorized? I'm not sure.

    Take, for instance, his Fox series TV Nation. Hilarious. Satirical. Pointed. His stuff is more like a news magazine injected with political commentary and humour.

    Like you, I am unsure of the accuracy of his statements. I agree with them in principle, but like most other things nowadays, what is the real 'truth'?

    'The truth is out there.' doo-doo-doo-doo, doo-doo-doo-doo Where is that damn Mulder when we need him?

    talesin

  • Realist
    Realist

    avishai,

    Yes, but since we do have firearms, That argument, though it sounds nice and is used A LOT is childish, unrealistic and silly

    so instead of doing something against it just let it continue the way it is? what kind of argument is this?

    the logical thing to do would be to forbid all weapons...most people would hand them in and after a while (and if it is 20 years) firearms would be removed from the population.

    better sart now than wait another minute.

    funky,

    of course it would have been better to report it accurately! exaggerations are unfortunately always used by all sides to make a point.

  • Daga
    Daga

    From Christopher Hitchens, not exactly a conservative.

    HITCHENS: But speaking here in my capacity as a polished, sophisticated European as well, it seems to me the laugh here is on the polished, sophisticated Europeans. They think Americans are fat, vulgar, greedy, stupid, ambitious and ignorant and so on. And they?ve taken as their own, as their representative American someone who actually embodies all of those qualities.

  • Daga
    Daga

    From Fred Barnes, Michael Moore and Me

    A FEW YEARS AGO Michael Moore, who's now promoting an anti-President Bush movie entitled Fahrenheit 9/11, announced he'd gotten the goods on me, indeed hung me out to dry on my own words. It was in his first bestselling book, Stupid White Men. Moore wrote he'd once been "forced" to listen to my comments on a TV chat show, The McLaughlin Group. I had whined "on and on about the sorry state of American education," Moore said, and wound up by bellowing: "These kids don't even know what The Iliad and The Odyssey are!"

    Moore's interest was piqued, so the next day he said he called me. "Fred," he quoted himself as saying, "tell me what The Iliad and The Odyssey are." I started "hemming and hawing," Moore wrote. And then I said, according to Moore: "Well, they're . . . uh . . . you know . . . uh . . . okay, fine, you got me--I don't know what they're about. Happy now?" He'd smoked me out as a fraud, or maybe worse.

    The only problem is none of this is true. It never happened. Moore is a liar. He made it up. It's a fabrication on two levels. One, I've never met Moore or even talked to him on the phone. And, two, I read both The Iliad and The Odyssey in my first year at the University of Virginia. Just for the record, I'd learned what they were about even before college. Like everyone else my age, I

    got my classical education from the big screen. I saw the Iliad movie called Helen of Troy and while I forget the name of the Odyssey film, I think it starred Kirk Douglas as Odysseus.

    So why didn't I scream bloody murder when the book came out in 2001? I didn't learn about the phony anecdote until it was brought to my attention by Alan Wolfe, who was reviewing Moore's book for the New Republic. He asked, by email, if the story were true. I said no, not a word of it, and Wolfe quoted me as saying that. That was enough, I thought. After all, who would take a shrill, lying lefty like Moore seriously?

    More people than I thought. Moore's new movie attacking Bush was given a 20-minute standing ovation at the Cannes Film Festival. Moore has described the movie as breaking new ground and revealing new facts, but the accounts by reviewers suggest it merely provides the standard left-wing, conspiratorial critique of the president. Reviewer Lou Lumenick of the New York Post, who gave Moore's previous movie Bowling for Columbine four stars, said the anti-Bush film would be news only "if you spent the last three years hiding in a cave in Afghanistan." Still, I suppose it's not surprising they loved it in France.

  • patio34
    patio34
    Yes, I see your point. He walks a very fine line. But I do think, that he does not produce documentaries in the strictest sense. How should his films be categorized? I'm not sure.

    Take, for instance, his Fox series TV Nation. Hilarious. Satirical. Pointed. His stuff is more like a news magazine injected with political commentary and humour.

    Like you, I am unsure of the accuracy of his statements. I agree with them in principle, but like most other things nowadays, what is the real 'truth'?

    'The truth is out there.' doo-doo-doo-doo, doo-doo-doo-doo Where is that damn Mulder when we need him? --Talesin

    I haven't read this thread because like Six, I'm not a real supporter of Moore. I did read Dude Where's My Country? and also read some of the "lies" purported to be in it and to me, they didn't amount to any real problem. But I didn't look into it that far because I'm not depending on Moore's allegations to arrive at my opinions.

    I saw Bowling for Columbine and completely disagreed with Moore's conclusions about the reasons America suffers from more violence per capita. But that was just my impression--it didn't add up.

    But I agree with Talesin's summation above--I wouldn't call Moore exactly a liar either as some have done or even called him an "America hater."

    I intend see his new film although I don't see that many "controversial" films (a la The Passion). I'm also going to see The Day After Tomorrow as soon as it opens, because it was ballyhooed as "the film Bush doesn't want you to see." Plus it looks like an interesting movie!

    Pat

  • Big Tex
    Big Tex
    I saw Bowling for Columbine and completely disagreed with Moore's conclusions about the reasons America suffers from more violence per capita. But that was just my impression--it didn't add up.

    That's pretty much how I feel Pat. I'm a bit more cynical in that it feels like something between spin doctoring and propaganda. It's just that I don't like (1) being preached to; and (2) feeling like someone is playing fast and loose with facts.

    I have no interest in seeing his new film, not because I'm conservative or liberal, but more because I feel that if someone shows you who they are, don't forget it.

  • avishai
    avishai
    the logical thing to do would be to forbid all weapons

    OK, no hands, feet teeth, rocks, water, sticks, etc., etc., etc.

    Next, If you are just talking about hand guns. The two cities with the highest rate of handgun violence, DC, and NYC, also have the highest rate of handgun restrictions. Interesting, no?

    Also, if you banned all handguns. AND managed to get people to hand them in, do you think it's just handgun manufacturers that can make guns? I can make a frickin' zip gun. Just about anyone can. Guns have been around for almost 600 years! The technology back then was'nt that great. Geez. It's a nice sentiment, and I appreciate your heart in the matter, I wish it would too. But, damn, it just won't.

  • Realist
    Realist

    avi,

    a person with a gun can cause way more damage than a person with a knife or a stick. and although some people could build primitive guns by themselfes thia would be a very limited problem.

    i don't know about the weapons law in DC and NYC. but i know NYC is THE or at least one of the safest large cities in the US.

    also if you have an outragous crime rate like DC than even though you have gun restrictions homicide with guns will occur.

    PS: why should everyone be allowed to have a gun? what is the need for it?

  • avishai
    avishai
    PS: why should everyone be allowed to have a gun? what is the need for it?

    Like switzerland, an armed society is a polite society.

  • Realist
    Realist

    avi,

    Like switzerland, an armed society is a polite society.

    what kind of argument is this? you mean the swiss are a civilized society because otherwise they would shoot each other?

    europe (caused by a better social system) has on average a much lower crime rate than the US. therefore it is natural that less homicides are caused by weapons use.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit