So everyone's seen Fahrenheit, right? So we all know that while Michael Moore is capable of creating controversy, some valid criticisms, and most of all - money, with films that skew perception via careful editing and omission, not necessarily lies. More like selective presentation.

Well, a local filmmaker here has made a film called Michael Moore Hates America. Now, the title may be a bit misleading if you think it's going to be a Moore hate fest. Certainly, it is a critisism of Moore's style as a "documentarian", but it's more of a commentary on how polarized and shrill our society has become.

I watched Fahrenheit for the first time today and enjoyed it. I then went out and watched MMHA, which I enjoyed more. Not because of the title, more so because it is, I think, very truthful and heartfelt. For example, the filmmaker, Michael Wilson, interviews a community leader from Moore's true hometown, Davison, MI. In order to get the information he wants, he pretends to be doing a documentary on small town living. He feels so guilty about it, he writes an e-mail to that person telling him he lied. The guy (mayor, or something, can't remember) allows him to use the footage, if it portrays Davison in a positive light. All of this is in the film. I think it lends alot of truth. Very enjoyable.

I don't know if any of you guys will be able to see it, since I don't think it's picked up a distributor yet, but keep an eye out.

CSP

I forget where, said the guy is putting together bullshit to ride on the $$$ that Farenheit was bringing in.

More of a joke than Moore's stuff, even.

lo que sucede sucede

> I forget where, said the guy is putting together bullshit to ride on the $$$
> that Farenheit was bringing in.
>


CSP

and reading a good bit about it.

not seen

lo que sucede sucede

> So everyone's seen Fahrenheit, right? So we all know that while Michael Moore is
> capable of creating controversy, some valid criticisms, and most of all - money,
> with films that skew perception via careful editing and omission, not
> necessarily lies. More like selective presentation.
>
> Well, a local filmmaker here has made a film called Michael Moore Hates America.
> Now, the title may be a bit misleading if you think it's going to be a Moore
> hate fest. Certainly, it is a critisism of Moore's style as a "documentarian",
> but it's more of a commentary on how polarized and shrill our society has
> become.
>
> I watched Fahrenheit for the first time today and enjoyed it. I then went out
> and watched MMHA, which I enjoyed more. Not because of the title, more so
> because it is, I think, very truthful and heartfelt. For example, the filmmaker,
> Michael Wilson, interviews a community leader from Moore's true hometown,
> Davison, MI. In order to get the information he wants, he pretends to be doing a
> documentary on small town living. He feels so guilty about it, he writes an
> e-mail to that person telling him he lied. The guy (mayor, or something, can't
> remember) allows him to use the footage, if it portrays Davison in a positive
> light. All of this is in the film. I think it lends alot of truth. Very
> enjoyable.
>
> I don't know if any of you guys will be able to see it, since I don't think it's
> picked up a distributor yet, but keep an eye out.
>
> CSP
>

> > So everyone's seen Fahrenheit, right? So we all know that while Michael Moore
> is
> > capable of creating controversy, some valid criticisms, and most of all -
> money,
> > with films that skew perception via careful editing and omission, not
> > necessarily lies. More like selective presentation.
> >
> > Well, a local filmmaker here has made a film called Michael Moore Hates
> America.
> > Now, the title may be a bit misleading if you think it's going to be a Moore
> > hate fest. Certainly, it is a critisism of Moore's style as a "documentarian",
> > but it's more of a commentary on how polarized and shrill our society has
> > become.
> >
> > I watched Fahrenheit for the first time today and enjoyed it. I then went out
> > and watched MMHA, which I enjoyed more. Not because of the title, more so
> > because it is, I think, very truthful and heartfelt. For example, the
> filmmaker,
> > Michael Wilson, interviews a community leader from Moore's true hometown,
> > Davison, MI. In order to get the information he wants, he pretends to be doing
> a
> > documentary on small town living. He feels so guilty about it, he writes an
> > e-mail to that person telling him he lied. The guy (mayor, or something, can't
> > remember) allows him to use the footage, if it portrays Davison in a positive
> > light. All of this is in the film. I think it lends alot of truth. Very
> > enjoyable.
> >
> > I don't know if any of you guys will be able to see it, since I don't think
> it's
> > picked up a distributor yet, but keep an eye out.
> >
> > CSP
> >
>


CSP

> and reading a good bit about it.
>
> not seen
>
> lo que sucede sucede
>


CSP

For sure it's fucked up

> For sure it's fucked up
>


CSP

He's a punk with an opinion

its a documantary, so it relies on information for validity. if the information in it is parallel to that in the trailers and the things the director says about it are true, the invalidity of those statements can mirror the invalidity rof the documentary. Unless he wanted to misrepresent and lie about the movie in the trailers in some absurd way, i think my judgement is fair.

lo que sucede sucede

> its a documantary, so it relies on information for validity. if the information
> in it is parallel to that in the trailers and the things the director says about
> it are true, the invalidity of those statements can mirror the invalidity rof
> the documentary. Unless he wanted to misrepresent and lie about the movie in the
> trailers in some absurd way, i think my judgement is fair.
>
> lo que sucede sucede
>


CSP

> He's a punk with an opinion

Though its pretty clear after reading the portion dedicated to Fahrenheit 9/11 that it's biased information.

I was asking what YOU didn't like. Why is he a punk?

CSP

Wikis allow anyone who wants to contribute to a document to do so, it's obvious that those who contributed have seen Wilson's film.

> I was asking what YOU didn't like. Why is he a punk?

Doesn't seem to know what he stands for! He makes a pretty bold statement yet does a very poor job of backing it up with few supportive claims, strawman arguments, he basically has no constructive criticism, and he can't even get his own ideas straight. Seems like he's just taking advantage of the hype and the opportunity.

> Wikis allow anyone who wants to contribute to a document to do so, it's obvious
> that those who contributed have seen Wilson's film.


That entire document is about the production of the film and the people that contributed to it, as if that has any bearing on the finished project. The one item that mentions something actually in the film is concerning the trailer. Similar to Moore's films, that's awfully far out of context. Oh, and all the reviews, most of which were positive.


> Doesn't seem to know what he stands for! He makes a pretty bold statement yet
> does a very poor job of backing it up with few supportive claims, strawman
> arguments, he basically has no constructive criticism, and he can't even get his
> own ideas straight. Seems like he's just taking advantage of the hype and the
> opportunity.


If you think the statement he's trying to make is that Michael Moore Hates America, then you didn't see the same film I did.


CSP

> That entire document is about the production of the film and the people that
> contributed to it, as if that has any bearing on the finished project. The one
> item that mentions something actually in the film is concerning the trailer.
> Similar to Moore's films, that's awfully far out of context. Oh, and all the
> reviews, most of which were positive.

Oh ok

> If you think the statement he's trying to make is that Michael Moore Hates
> America, then you didn't see the same film I did.

Nope


Sorry, I don't feel like arguing, I've had a really long day, nothing personal... Maybe I'll explain my opinion with a more whole-heartedly effort later

Also if you want something a bit more subjective with counter interviews from people who's words were used by Moore in his film against their wishes, or spliced to get answers he liked. Or perhaps a set of new interviews and actual factual info to debunk the crap out of that movie go check out Farenhype 9/11 ...it really puts Moore's work in perspective.

i remember what i thought, but i dont have a goddamn dossier.

lo que sucede sucede

> i remember what i thought, but i dont have a goddamn dossier.


I'd be interested to hear some varying viewpoints. It is, after all, very easy to point things out without actually having to discuss them at length.

CSP

> Also if you want something a bit more subjective with counter interviews from
> people who's words were used by Moore in his film against their wishes, or
> spliced to get answers he liked. Or perhaps a set of new interviews and actual
> factual info to debunk the crap out of that movie go check out Farenhype 9/11
> ...it really puts Moore's work in perspective.


Everyone already knows how Moore's films work. That's not that interesting. What is interesting is the journey this filmmaker goes on from trying to debunk Moore, to acting like him, to realizing his mistakes and correcting himself, to finally saying - that's his style, I don't like it, this is mine, you guys decide what's best for you. It's not really about debunking Moore, although there are quite a few potshots.

CSP

> i remember what i thought, but i dont have a goddamn dossier.
>
> lo que sucede sucede
>

sorry i sounded like a cunt. ive been.. insane reently.

lo que sucede sucede