As much as I enjoy free speech and what not in this wonderful country of ours, I must admit it really is just plain classless to use a world wide stage like that to throw across your wacky ideas and agendas. I used to like Michael Moore, but I am quickly coming to the realization that he is a wackadoo to put not such a fine point on it.
From the desk of Swordsman Yen In a word, GOOD! I've always thought Michael Moore was like Rush Limbaugh, only he's a big fat left-wing idiot instead of a big fat right-wing idiot. I hope this sinks his career so much that the only movies he'll appear in are the security camera videos at the drive-thru window at Burger King.
First of all, as I have always understood freedom of speech it means NOTHING if you only protect the freedom of those you AGREE with.
Second of all, I find it odd that czwfans,com reacted to this incident by thinking that it was FUNNY, which in all honesty I think that it was, and here on WV we are stomping around all SHOCKED and APPALLED that Michael Moore dared to voice an opinion.
Third of all, I wonder if the documentarians (the other nominees in the category) that Michael Moore dragged up to the stage with him knew what he was about to do?
Fourth of all, Pedro Almadovar made a much classier (though possibly too subtle) anti-war speech.
Originally posted by LlakorFourth of all, Pedro Almadovar made a much classier (though possibly too subtle) anti-war speech.
Agreed! Subtlety seems to be lost on Michael Moore. Just because some of us agree with Michael Moore's ideas doesn't mean Mr. Moore should have gone off on such a huge rant. Some things are better left low-key, much like Mr. Almadovar's speech.
For the record, I agree with Michael Moore's thoughts. But I think he took it too far.
Forget Brock! TRINITY is the Next Big Thing! Congrats to both Kid Kash and TRINITY~! on signing long-term deals with TNA!
hey michael moore had the freedom to voice his opinion when it was inappropriate to do so and he did. The audience also had the freedom to voice their dissent...so Moore goes on his rant and he gets booed. Everyone uses free speech in this situation right?
Look, the academy gave him the award, and shouldn't have expected him to be try and be classy for at least one night.
BTW, people who are shocked and shitting on Moore's poor use of words are using their free speech as well...as well as the people who defend his statements. ALSO, if anyone really watched bowling for columbine, you'd know its not a real documentary.
"I am many things Kal-El, but here I am god." -Darkseid
Michael Moore never pulls any punches, he'll say what's on his mind and say it clearly. He won this award deservedly and it's a once in a life time opportunity on such a stage to get his message across and he took it, if he didn't he'd be a hypocrite.
He's not a Hollywood kissass or will ever be considered Hollywood elite, so I'm sure he gives a rats ass if he ruffled the feathers of some pompous academy bigwigs.
Was mentioned Three times, 3X, 3X. In the "Great Wieners" thread!
I'm glad he said what he said. I'm surprised he got booed, but I guess most of the folks were afraid of backlash, since a lot of them were much more outspoken at the IS awards. But hey, that's why I love America. He can say things, you can call him an asshole, and I can say more power to him.
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it." - Robert E. Lee
Originally posted by The Vile1 ALSO, if anyone really watched bowling for columbine, you'd know its not a real documentary.
The only difference between Michael Moore's work and the work of most documentary filmmakers is that Moore states his bias right from the get-go.
Is this film any more biased than Not a Love Story? How about If You Love This Planet? What about Grass? Or a Thin Blue Line?
The truth is that all documentaries by virtue of what they chose to show and what they choose to omit take positions, viewpoints and biases. Sometimes those biases are just that they will show the entertaining over the banal. More frequently, the documentary films have a political opinion. There's nothing wrong with that. There is something wrong (IMHO) with concealing that opinion or try to pretend that one does not exist.
I love how the crowd boos Michael Moore, and then gives a standing ovation (and the damn BEST DIRECTOR AWARD) to child rapist Roman Polanski. Classy move.
"I have no intention of uttering my last words on the stage. Room service and a couple of depraved young women will do me quite nicely for an exit."-- Peter O'Toole
"I'm gonna rip the eyes out of your head, and piss down your dead skull!" -- Jack Nicholson, in A Few Good Men
That's not exactly what I meant Llakor. I mean in the sense that Moore altered events and facts and did a hell of a lot of manipulation. Moore set up quite a bit of scenarios, and leaves out facts in many arguements. Now I remember that Moore's first movie Roger and Me wasn't nominated for an academy award for best documentary for similar reasons, so I was just wondering why they let bowling for columbine pass even though it didn't follow the academy's regulations.
In the end I think our definitions of documentary might slightly differ, but even though Barry Blaustein is a big wrestling fan and kind of had a bias there, I still think Beyond the mat shows a fair amount of the good and bad sides of professional wrestling (but I guess a lot would say mostly bad)...Alright bad example maybe. Ok, my college english teacher told me that "High objectivity with slight subjectivity is the key..." I think what that means is that its basically ok to let people know your side of the issue and your personal politics in a subtle way, but not to shove them down the reader/audiences' throats in order for it show some form of objectivity. I know, its confusing and screwed up, please don't take it too personally.
"I am many things Kal-El, but here I am god." -Darkseid
Michael Moore intentionally lied and fabricated things in his documentary, and has even admitted since then that accuracy doesn't matter in comedies. Anyways, people like him just make the entire anti-war movement look bad. And man, is he ever going to get over Florida?
Regarding getting over Florida, I believe using the Whitewater principle the statute of limitations on getting over things regarding politics is approximately 25 years or when the person you despise is out of office for good. So I would say by 2009 at the latest he should be all set to move on.
"It is well that war is so terrible, lest we grow too fond of it." - Robert E. Lee
What I found truly funny is they discovered the chemical weapons factory shortly before his speech.
"fictious reasons" my ass.
I just got the entire situation that he was a fat, bitter, tactless man who deserves pity.
And he also cemented whether or not I'll ever go see Bowling for Columbine.
"The time for debate is really beforehand. Obviously history will speak on whether this was the right thing or the wrong thing, but right now (the soldiers) are out there. Support 'em. There's plenty of time for commentary later." -David Robinson
Originally posted by kazhayashi81What I found truly funny is they discovered the chemical weapons factory shortly before his speech.
"fictious reasons" my ass.
I just got the entire situation that he was a fat, bitter, tactless man who deserves pity.
And he also cemented whether or not I'll ever go see Bowling for Columbine.
Fiction's a funny thing, though...
Is sending in inspectors to look for things that we knew, for a fact, were there in the first place (because, in part, we sold them to them ourselves) to provide an excuse to invade a country any less of a work of fiction than making a mock-umentary?
Granted, Michael Moore is... less than discreet. But, then again, so are most of the people in this country. Go read the rants on Charlie Daniels' website, for example, and the responses to them. Most of the country is less than subtle. He just happens to be one of the few loud, obnoxious, tactless liberals.
Kansas-born and deeply ashamed The last living La Parka Marka: HE raised the briefcase!
Originally posted by Nate The SnakeHe just happens to be one of the few loud, obnoxious, tactless liberals.
Replace few with many and you're right on.
Anyway, I'd like to dissect the latest lie from this untalented piece of shit.
"We live in the time where we have fictitious election results that elect a fictitious president. We live in a time where we have a man who's sending us to war for fictitious reasons, whether it's the fiction of duct tape or the fiction of orange alerts. We are against this war, Mr. Bush. Shame on you, Mr. Bush. Shame on you,"
- George W. Bush had sufficient votes to win the electoral college. What's so fictitious about that. It's a part of the same constitution that protects his right to free speech. - Fictious reasons? We did, afterall, find the chemical weapons plant five days into the war after the inspectors didn't get it done in several months and/or years. - Duct tape....yeah, I'll give him that. - Orange alerts? He has a problem with preparation? - Who is the "we" who are against the war? Public opinion is now more in favor of the war than it ever was before.
The fact that the picked a tactless moment(after it had been revealed that US troops were being executed by Iraqis) shows that he has no common sense and, as kazhayashi mentioned, is just a fat, bitter, tactless man who deserves pity.
(edited by Grimis on 24.3.03 0702) There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. - Theodore Roosevelt, Ocotber 12, 1915
It should also be noted that he recieved a standing ovation, which underscores just how divided the country really is.
And, yeah, he was a little heavy-handed, but he is Michael Moore. What do you expect when you give Michael Moore a live mic and international television time?
(And I also think that most of "Bowling For Columbine"'s critics haven't seen it, because, rather than left-wing propaganda, I think it makes the strongest *anti* gun control points I've ever heard. And it probably skewers Clinton more than any other figure, save Charlton Heston. This was probably the only deserving winner all night, but that's a whole other thread...)
(And while even I'm tired of discussing the 2000 election results, the facts remain the same. Not only did Gore recieve the clear majority of the popular vote, even the most conservative sources agree that Gore got more votes in Florida. He wouldn't have gotten them using the recounting standards he wanted, but that doesn't change the fact that more people in the state of Florida cast their vote for Al Gore than George W. Bush in 2000. And I personally will get over it in 2004, even if Dubya gets "re"elected, unless the same thing happens again.)
I agree, it was a bit too heavy-handed and tactless, but just because he's not speaking for *you*, doesn't mean he's not speaking for an incredibly large percentage of this country and the planet.
Originally posted by OlFuzzyBastardbut just because he's not speaking for *you*, doesn't mean he's not speaking for an incredibly large percentage of this country and the planet.
Note: This is EXTREMELY LONG, with tons of quotations, read it if you have patience and are interested in seeing what goes on on our campuses. Islamic Radicals On Campus By Erick Stakelbeck FrontPageMagazine.