Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all. Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
Joined: September 21 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 242
Topic: Michael Moore Posted: December 21 2010 at 01:33
I'm a pretty liberal guy, but Moore's arguments are emotionally-based and poorly constructed. Sicko should have praised the healthcare reforms of Western Europe or Canada, but CUBA? What a joke. The film was banned in Cuba because it showed a quality of healthcare that only the elite few received, and Cuba's government didn't want it to incite a revolution.
Joined: March 21 2008
Location: Tigerstaden
Status: Offline
Points: 34055
Posted: December 16 2010 at 04:05
Michael Moore is viling to bail out Julian Assanges from jail , so he is on Wikileaks side, or at least suports Julian. and also are willing to cooporate, by lending his own network. so Ive read it. , they ionly need a third guy to beocme the three prophets for freedom from diplomatic correctness and secrets, if only Jon Stewart also join thier ranks and become their ancorer, that would be cool, Julian provieds the info and runs the buisnes and network, Moore is the corespondent and goes out and interviews in the fiels and Jon to what he dose best, he host the show and presents the leaks, and documents in the best daily show manner, with a ton of satire. (I can see it for me)
Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493
Posted: December 15 2010 at 23:38
I've always had a problem with "let's replace capitalism with democracy"... I mean one is an economic system, the other one is a political system. That kind of misinformation is learned by some people who don't know better and then they have some ridiculous misconceptions.
Joined: July 27 2010
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 165
Posted: December 15 2010 at 23:32
Well, I've seen Bowling for Columbine, Farenheit 9/11 and Capitalism: A Love Story. I probably agree with about 87% of what he has to say. I always get really angry when I see his movies, but I understand a filmmaker has to play with emotions to get his point across.
Joined: October 15 2009
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 1902
Posted: December 07 2010 at 19:21
I agree with him most of the time. I find his films quite entertaining, as we share similar views pertaining to health care, 9/11, gun control, and the like.
Joined: March 05 2010
Location: Knowhere, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 918
Posted: June 08 2010 at 14:11
I voted "Never" but there needs to an "Almost Never" option. I do agree that he has some very interesting things to say, but I think I would be able to respect him more if his films were fairer and more mature.
"I am the one who crossed through space...or stayed where I was...or didn't exist in the first place...."
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Posted: June 06 2010 at 04:53
Slartibartfast wrote:
Mike wasn't engaged in oversimplification that much. He was just making a comparison between what goes on in our country vs. Canada.
As an outsider, I thought the point he was making (or at least trying to) was not so much between the two countries, but between two cities (Detroit and Windsor) connected by the Ambassador Bridge.. illustrating the differences between the two cultures barely a mile apart across a strip of asphalt and concrete.
Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 20248
Posted: June 06 2010 at 03:25
fourth page already???
I'll agree with Moore most of the time, (roughly 95% of the time) although I didn't see his latest (lack of time)
but for a movie like Fahrenheit 911, he wasn'learning me a lot.... I suspected roughly 80% of what he told us in there.
let's just stay above the moral melee prefer the sink to the gutter keep our sand-castle virtues content to be a doer as well as a thinker, prefer lifting our pen rather than un-sheath our sword
Joined: February 11 2009
Location: Vancouver, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 3196
Posted: June 04 2010 at 15:33
Most of the stuff he talks about is pretty dead-on. You would have to be completely brainwashed to disagree with EVERY thing he says, regardless if you do or don't like him.
But in Bowling For Columbine, i think he painted Canada a bit differently than it really is. It basically tried to get the point across that Canada doesn't have murders, and people don't lock their doors and there isn't much to be scared about here. Maybe its just that Vancouver is a scarier place to live then a border town in Ontario, but our house got broken into two months ago; there have been about 4 or 5 murders in a 10 block radius the past year, and a neighbour got firebombed in a gang-related dispute...
Joined: April 29 2006
Location: Atlantais
Status: Offline
Points: 29630
Posted: June 04 2010 at 11:47
thellama73 wrote:
Meat. I don't see how it's an oversimplification. The situation in the film was that the company was losing money by continuing to employ these people. Any sane business owner would have laid them all off, but Michael tries to paint the company as evil because it doesn't want to lose money.
The company wasn't losing money, they just wanted a larger percentage to go to the top. I can't eat rabbits as they are too cute what with their wiggly noses and everything. Though they do tend to poop a lot...
Edited by Slartibartfast - December 07 2010 at 19:54
Meat. I don't see how it's an oversimplification. The situation in the film was that the company was losing money by continuing to employ these people. Any sane business owner would have laid them all off, but Michael tries to paint the company as evil because it doesn't want to lose money.
There, you see? You did it again. ; )
"Es ist übrigens unmöglich, eine Meinung zu haben, ohne dass es unerfreuliche Überschneidungen gibt. Die Grünen sind für den deutschen Wald, die NPD ebenfalls."
Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
Posted: June 04 2010 at 10:07
Meat. I don't see how it's an oversimplification. The situation in the film was that the company was losing money by continuing to employ these people. Any sane business owner would have laid them all off, but Michael tries to paint the company as evil because it doesn't want to lose money.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.156 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Michael Moore
Topic Options
, they ionly need a third guy to beocme the three prophets for freedom from diplomatic correctness and secrets, if only Jon Stewart also join thier ranks and become their ancorer, that would be cool, Julian provieds the info and runs the buisnes and network, Moore is the corespondent and goes out and interviews in the fiels and Jon to what he dose best, he host the show and presents the leaks, and documents in the best daily show manner, with a ton of satire. (I can see it for me)
Slartibartfast wrote:
