Anything Forums

I understand your point fragged, but like I eluded to before, I don't care if you completely disagree with him or if you love every word the man utters, the fact that someone, no matter what their political ideologies are, is able to make movies like these says something about both topics.

fragged one wrote: but they *didn't* give him a free gun in the bank. it was set up beforehand.

But Jan Jacobson, the bank employee who worked with Mr. Moore on his account, says that only happened because Mr. Moore's film company had worked for a month to stage the scene. "What happened at the bank was a prearranged thing," she says. The gun was brought from a gun dealer in another city, where it would normally have to be picked up. "Typically, you're looking at a week to 10 days waiting period," she says. Ms. Jacobson feels used: "He just portrayed us as backward hicks."

You can either dwell on the fact that Moore does put his own spin on things and hate him and discredit him for that, or you can acknowledge the fact that the bank in question was rewarding customers for opening up accounts with rifles. Which is really what the whole scene was about. It's the same thing with the big controversy that arose about the Farenheit 9/11 interview with that congressman who when asked if he would enlist his kids in the military to go to Iraq and he replied with "I have three cousins over their right now and a brother-in-law" or whatever it was, and Moore didn't put that in his movie. It still doesn't excuse the fact that only one congressman has a child enlisted in the military. He's a propagandist we're all aware of that, the entire world is aware of that, there's no need for you to warn everyone. The fact is, he's a damn good propagandist. In order to truly appreciate a movie like Moore's, you need to be able to sift through what is his opinion, and appreciate it for being just that (his opinion), and recognize the reality of what he is saying. Sure not all of it is reality, much if it is slanted because much of it comes from the mind of Micheal Moore himself, but it's not like he can just make this crap up and slap it up on the big screen and start setting records with it. The connections/ties and inconsistencies he points out are all facts in reality, what are not facts are the conclusions the movie makes from these ties and inconsistencies, that is Moore's opinion. I think it's funny when people get so defensive when the topic of Micheal Moore comes up simply because the man's opinion is so influential it scares them. I don't know, like I said, I'm not going to claim it's a great movie, but I liked it. I guess, to the people who want to discredit Moore because he's good at what he does, all I have to say is, I have yet to see a convincing movie claiming that we don't have a gun problem in the U.S. or that we did have very good reasons to invade Iraq. Seriously, I think someone should make one, then we could watch them both, back to back, we each could pick our favorite movie and no one would have anything to complain about.

he's just playing on american's propensity for trust and ignorance.

Interesting choice of words, since american's propensity for trust and ignorance seemed to be the exact reason Moore made the film in the first place. (to make people aware of it, not play off of it)

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2675

Interesting choice of words, since american's propensity for trust and ignorance seemed to be the exact reason Moore made the film in the first place. (to make people aware of it, not play off of it)

if that is true, then why did he outright lie and COMPLETELY mislead the viewers of the truth?

the bank scene wasn't just to show that you could get a gun for opening up an account, it was to show that you could not only get a gun from a bank for opening up an account, but you could get it at the bank. he made a specific point about that.

hitler couldn't make propaganda that good. moore used fuzzy, incomplete, and just plain made up numbers. moore lied and blatantly misled. he didn't just angle it to his view, he scripted his view and fed it to you making you believe that what he was showing was fact.

i could care less about moore's opinion, but the fact that he takes your ignorance, amplifies it, and makes water out of dust with it is what upsets me.

what did i do when i watched that bank scene? i paused it, thought about it, and figured that there was no way that a bank would hand out a gun in the bank. i looked it up, and found that it was, indeed, false.

what would regular joe american do? hook-line-sinker, in moore's pocket, and disbelieve anything to the contrary unless compelled to in some way.

like i said, hitler couldn't make propaganda this good, because hitler held higher morals.

Seriously, I think someone should make one, then we could watch them both, back to back, we each could pick our favorite movie and no one would have anything to complain about.

bull . i dislike propaganda in general...it doesn't quite work that way. although, i can't think of any way that anyone could twist facts, and make up reality in the way that moore does.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2686

Propagonda rocks, it's so fun to see all the contrevorsy that can be made with it.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2700

like i said, hitler couldn't make propaganda this good, because hitler held higher morals.

Obviously you're not familiar with Hitler's wartime propaganda.

bull . i dislike propaganda in general...it doesn't quite work that way.

I don't see why not. If we had some pro-Bush movie out there raking in the money, the people that like the war with Iraq could go see that one and the people who don't like it could go see Moore's movie. Why wouldn't that work? That way all this ignorance crap you've been ranting about would be moot because there would be equal exposure to both sides. As it stands, Moore's side is the only one who cares enough or is angry enough to actually do it. Well, damn him for having intiative huh?

he takes your ignorance

Why am I ignorant? Because I think he made an entertaining movie? Because I realize what is fact and what is opinion? Who are you to judge my intelligence based on what I think of a movie? Insults are the weakest form of argumentation.

he scripted his view and fed it to you making you believe that what he was showing was fact.

Micheal Moore has no control over what people choose to believe. He made a movie building a case for his opinion. Anyone who doesn't realize that after all the hype the movie got is either retarded or has been living in a cave for the last year. I understand that you don't like him, but don't play it off like the guy is just spreading lies all over the big screen, cause that's more of a lie than anything he does. The connections are there, the ties are there, the inconsistencies are there, he points them out and tells you what he thinks they mean and what they possibly could mean. He draws conclusions from facts, like them or not.

Have you seen Farenheit 9/11? I don't notice you talking about much except the bank that was giving away guns.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2701

I think the real issue the movie hit on was gun control and regulation, which is very lax. A gun is a large responsibility, it is not something to be taken lightly, yet here in America, it is taken lightly, and the movie backed that up.

You have the right to bear arms, that means the government cannot ban it's citizens from owning weapons, it does not mean you can have any weapon you want with no questions asked. So where is the regulation for a responibility as great as owning a weapon? Once again, the movie showed a severe lack of any type of regulation here. You can go to K-mart and buy as much ammunition as you want. Notice how other counties don't have as much of a problem and then compair our laws and regulations... hmmm.... And notice how easy it is to get around many of the regulations...

Overall, I think you take from the movie what you want. Most of what is said is true to some extent, and he never makes any claim that it is true for all, but you have to accept that these thing do influence us, how much seems to be up to each individual.


Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2706

MrSelf wrote: I think the real issue the movie hit on was gun control and regulation, which is very lax. A gun is a large responsibility, it is not something to be taken lightly, yet here in America, it is taken lightly, and the movie backed that up.

You have the right to bear arms, that means the government cannot ban it's citizens from owning weapons, it does not mean you can have any weapon you want with no questions asked. So where is the regulation for a responibility as great as owning a weapon? Once again, the movie showed a severe lack of any type of regulation here. You can go to K-mart and buy as much ammunition as you want. Notice how other counties don't have as much of a problem and then compair our laws and regulations... hmmm.... And notice how easy it is to get around many of the regulations...

You're talking about "Bowling" right?

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2708

shenbaw...i stated earlier that i have not seen farenheit 911, and that my frame of reference is from two of his films: canadain bacon, and bowling for columbine.

i never accused you of being ignorant, perhaps i should have used 'one' instead of 'you'.

and no, two movies with opposite views is not the answer, because then you hvae two sides hiding the truth. the truth needs to be exposed, not half-truths and lies.

go ahead and tell me exactly what facts moore gave in bowling for columbine?


btw...there is no bank scene, to my knowledge, in farenheit 911...have you seen it?


michael moore has no contol over what people believe, absolutely true, but he doesn't give you much choice unless you seek out the information.


i only have one request of michael moore: to stop mis-labeling his films as documentaries, and label them as fiction.

doc·u·men·ta·ry
Presenting facts objectively without editorializing or inserting fictional matter, as in a book or film.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2710

shenbaw wrote: You're talking about "Bowling" right?

yeah, sorry, I guess it is off topic...

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2711

MrSelf wrote: Overall, I think you take from the movie what you want. Most of what is said is true to some extent, and he never makes any claim that it is true for all, but you have to accept that these thing do influence us, how much seems to be up to each individual.

he DOES make a claim that it is all true by calling it a documentary!

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2712

i never accused you of being ignorant

he takes your ignorance

Whatever, doesn't matter admin.

there is no bank scene, to my knowledge, in farenheit 911...have you seen it?

Did I say there was? Yes, I just saw it last night.

michael moore has no contol over what people believe, absolutely true, but he doesn't give you much choice unless you seek out the information.

I think, if you asked him, that's what he would prefer people to do. I know he would not advise watching his movie and believing every word of it without any other information.

go ahead and tell me exactly what facts moore gave in bowling for columbine?

The ratio of gun ownership to gun related homocide in the United States as compared to the rest of the world for one.

i only have one request of michael moore: to stop mis-labeling his films as documentaries, and label them as fiction.

I think a more accurate label would be "a slanted documentary."

Go see Farenheit 9/11, then let's talk moore.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2713

shenbaw...go back and read my post. you are taking it entirely out of context.

if he preferred people to seek out this information, then he would give the facts, instead of sexing them up, and tell you to seek out the facts...and he would stop calling them documentaries, because, they aren't.

as far as seeing farnheit 911, it will be a while:

i plan on watching the movie, but not in the theater, and not renting or buying the dvd, but rather when it is available for mass download. i have absolutely no opinion of the movie, as i have not seen it, but based upon a prior 'documentary' by michael moore, i'm expecting that it will be much of the same: half-assed interviews where moore doesn't allow a sufficient answer, outright lies and pathetic displays (ie. the bank scene from bowling for columbine), and complete half-truths without the intention of giving the whole truth.

so, no, i have no opinion of the movie, as i haven't seen it, but i do have some expectations...and based upon those expectations, michael moore will not make a single cent from me.

...i thought i said that here, but it was another forum. my apologies.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2715

So are you telling me that you won't have any input on the Farenheit 9/11 thread for awhile? Or will you just participate based on your prior opinion of Micheal Moore the man? Maybe we should start a thread just for Moore talk. I like that joke.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2716

shenbaw wrote: So are you telling me that you won't have any input on the Farenheit 9/11 thread for awhile? Or will you just participate based on your prior opinion of Micheal Moore the man? Maybe we should start a thread just for Moore talk. I like that joke.

haha...more talk.

yeah, we probably should. i've been pretty off-topic, as i haven't stated anything about the movie itself, just the dictator of it.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2718

btw...canadian bacon was a horrible film.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2719

If I hear one Moore joke....

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2724

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2736

shenbaw wrote:

nothing moore to say?

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2744

Not untill I have someone to talk to who's seen the movie that this thread is about.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2778

shenbaw wrote: Not untill I have someone to talk to who's seen the movie that this thread is about.   

i don't have time to watch anymoore movies.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2779

But you have time to have an opinion on them. Even ones you haven't seen.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2786

shenbaw wrote: But you have time to have an opinion on them. Even ones you haven't seen.

i never stated an opinion on farenheit 911. i stated an opinion of michael moore.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2791

I saw the film. And to be honest, for the most part, I found it very interesting. Of course, I'll have to put in the time to research some of that stuff on my own, but all in all, it was pretty good. I think part of that comes from my expectation to see Moore use strategic scene cuts, strategically isolating quotes from their proper context, etc., so I knew what I was getting into. I still dislike his methods, but for this one he either cleaned up his act a bit (just a bit), or performed some amazing deception.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2792

fragged one wrote: i never stated an opinion on farenheit 911.  i stated an opinion of michael moore.

In a Farenheit 9/11 forum.

Stasi wrote: I saw the film. And to be honest, for the most part, I found it very interesting. Of course, I'll have to put in the time to research some of that stuff on my own, but all in all, it was pretty good. I think part of that comes from my expectation to see Moore use strategic scene cuts, strategically isolating quotes from their proper context, etc., so I knew what I was getting into. I still dislike his methods, but for this one he either cleaned up his act a bit (just a bit), or performed some amazing deception.

I'm with ya Stasi. I thought it was very entertaining and was much more humorous than I expected. If one has the ability to laugh at Bush at all, I think they would like the movie. You definitely have to take his work with a grain of salt and understand what he's doing and not what you think he's trying to do. I particularly like all the cameos of the Bush buddies before they were interviewed. That's just great intro. material (and use of extra footage), it really gives you the feeling that you're seeing the real people in the movie and not the politicians.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2794

shenbaw wrote: In a Farenheit 9/11 forum. 

a film by michael moore.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2795

shenbaw wrote: Maybe we should start a thread just for Moore talk.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:281, old post ID:2796