Michael Moore Hates America

**Hoplite** · 07-06-2011

So, I came across a documentary a few days back and days back and decided to give it a watch out of fairness.

It’s called Michael Moore Hates America
Michael Moore Hates America - Watch the Documentary Film for Free | Watch Free Documentaries Online | SnagFilms

For fun, I’m going to say what I think about this documentary THEN tell you what I think of Michael Moore, just to see who will actually read the whole post.

I was not terribly impressed with the documentary. The presenter seemed to have the same problem that Moore does; whenever he had a cogent point he tended to bury it under garbage or not do what was necessary to prove his point.

A good example was when the film was talking about Moore editing Charlton Heston’s speech to make Heston look bad, all the filmmaker (Michael Wilson) had to do was to show a dual clip (side by side or sequentially) of Heston’s actual speech and the version Moore showed in the movie and his point would have been easily proven. Instead, he went on a tear about how bad it is to edit things the way Moore does.

He goes on to claim that Moore isn’t actually from Flint, except he never really shows any proof of that except for a city official in another town claiming Moore is actually from HIS town. Beyond that…nothing.

The filmmaker also did something I particularly hate. I watch a lot of documentaries (A LOT of documentaries) and a lot of them are on controversial topics. A good documentary will have people on both or all sides of an issue talking and the people will be relatively balanced. In this documentary, virtually the only people the guy talked to hated Moore and the only people who supported Moore that he would talk to looked like drooling morons. He had two or three even-keeled looking people on who supported Moore…and happened to agree with the filmmaker’s position. To me, regardless of the topic of filmmaker, that says the filmmaker was either too lazy to find truly intelligent people on both sides or deliberately avoided finding intelligent contributors on the opposition side to make that side look bad.

Wilson also tapped another severe irritation of mine. I dislike it when a documentary filmmakers are looking for one specific person, they can’t find or get a hold of that person, and then make some sort of jab or grumbling comment that that person is avoiding them. In fairness, Wilson doesn’t do this nearly as much as I’ve seen other filmmakers do it, but he still does it. As great as it would be to get that person’s insight or response to something, they are not obligated to talk to you and they should not feel obligated by anything you say or do. I don’t care who you are, you shouldn’t feel obligated to rush to respond to every curmudgeon that comes knocking on your door, film crew or not.

I applaud Wilson’s stated goal of creating a film that questions Moore, but that is not how the documentary comes off. It comes off like an attack piece which is exactly what the filmmaker claims his movie isn’t.

In the interests of full disclosure and fairness, I have watched many of Moore’s films and I did used to really like him. At this point, I’ve been liking him less and less. Every time he makes a cogent point, he buries in a pile of crap that dilutes its impact or he chooses ways to demonstrate problems and ideas that really turn people off unless they already agree with him. Universal healthcare is an easy sell idea; it’s feasible, it’s cheaper than our current system, it’s more effective, virtually every other first-world country in the world has opted to go with it, healthcare in America is a train wreck and everybody knows it. Except Moore took such a ham-handed approach to presenting the idea in Sicko that it really made me, an ardent supporter of universal healthcare, cringe. While I may agree with some of his positions and I applaud his stated goals, I can’t stand his method of presentation and his behavior because it reflects badly on what he and others are trying to do.

**JDJarvis** · 07-06-2011

Originally Posted by Hoplite

So, I came across a documentary a few days back and days back and decided to give it a watch out of fairness.

It’s called Michael Moore Hates America
Michael Moore Hates America - Watch the Documentary Film for Free | Watch Free Documentaries Online | SnagFilms

where's the film in question? I'm missing it somehow.

In the interests of full disclosure and fairness, I have watched many of Moore’s films and I did used to really like him. At this point, I’ve been liking him less and less. Every time he makes a cogent point, he buries in a pile of crap that dilutes its impact or he chooses ways to demonstrate problems and ideas that really turn people off unless they already agree with him. Universal healthcare is an easy sell idea; it’s feasible, it’s cheaper than our current system, it’s more effective, virtually every other first-world country in the world has opted to go with it, healthcare in America is a train wreck and everybody knows it. Except Moore took such a ham-handed approach to presenting the idea in Sicko that it really made me, an ardent supporter of universal healthcare, cringe. While I may agree with some of his positions and I applaud his stated goals, I can’t stand his method of presentation and his behavior because it reflects badly on what he and others are trying to do.

I used to like Micheal Moore too then I got older and wiser. When I saw "Bowling for Columbine" which is touted as a gun control movie, that isn't what I saw: it was a film favoring responsible gun use with a responsible media, Moore fell flat on his face and no one seemed to notice.
Moore is currently a rich man exploiting workers to make sure he get's to keep being a rich man so maybe that's why he's slipped a bit.

**jviehe** · 07-06-2011

This should be in breaking news...

**CharlesDavenport** · 07-06-2011

Originally Posted by Hoplite

So, I came across a documentary a few days back and days back and decided to give it a watch out of fairness.

It’s called Michael Moore Hates America
Michael Moore Hates America - Watch the Documentary Film for Free | Watch Free Documentaries Online | SnagFilms

For fun, I’m going to say what I think about this documentary THEN tell you what I think of Michael Moore, just to see who will actually read the whole post.

I was not terribly impressed with the documentary. The presenter seemed to have the same problem that Moore does; whenever he had a cogent point he tended to bury it under garbage or not do what was necessary to prove his point.

A good example was when the film was talking about Moore editing Charlton Heston’s speech to make Heston look bad, all the filmmaker (Michael Wilson) had to do was to show a dual clip (side by side or sequentially) of Heston’s actual speech and the version Moore showed in the movie and his point would have been easily proven. Instead, he went on a tear about how bad it is to edit things the way Moore does.

He goes on to claim that Moore isn’t actually from Flint, except he never really shows any proof of that except for a city official in another town claiming Moore is actually from HIS town. Beyond that…nothing.

The filmmaker also did something I particularly hate. I watch a lot of documentaries (A LOT of documentaries) and a lot of them are on controversial topics. A good documentary will have people on both or all sides of an issue talking and the people will be relatively balanced. In this documentary, virtually the only people the guy talked to hated Moore and the only people who supported Moore that he would talk to looked like drooling morons. He had two or three even-keeled looking people on who supported Moore…and happened to agree with the filmmaker’s position. To me, regardless of the topic of filmmaker, that says the filmmaker was either too lazy to find truly intelligent people on both sides or deliberately avoided finding intelligent contributors on the opposition side to make that side look bad.

Wilson also tapped another severe irritation of mine. I dislike it when a documentary filmmakers are looking for one specific person, they can’t find or get a hold of that person, and then make some sort of jab or grumbling comment that that person is avoiding them. In fairness, Wilson doesn’t do this nearly as much as I’ve seen other filmmakers do it, but he still does it. As great as it would be to get that person’s insight or response to something, they are not obligated to talk to you and they should not feel obligated by anything you say or do. I don’t care who you are, you shouldn’t feel obligated to rush to respond to every curmudgeon that comes knocking on your door, film crew or not.

I applaud Wilson’s stated goal of creating a film that questions Moore, but that is not how the documentary comes off. It comes off like an attack piece which is exactly what the filmmaker claims his movie isn’t.

In the interests of full disclosure and fairness, I have watched many of Moore’s films and I did used to really like him. At this point, I’ve been liking him less and less. Every time he makes a cogent point, he buries in a pile of crap that dilutes its impact or he chooses ways to demonstrate problems and ideas that really turn people off unless they already agree with him. Universal healthcare is an easy sell idea; it’s feasible, it’s cheaper than our current system, it’s more effective, virtually every other first-world country in the world has opted to go with it, healthcare in America is a train wreck and everybody knows it. Except Moore took such a ham-handed approach to presenting the idea in Sicko that it really made me, an ardent supporter of universal healthcare, cringe. While I may agree with some of his positions and I applaud his stated goals, I can’t stand his method of presentation and his behavior because it reflects badly on what he and others are trying to do.

A cogent point is by definition well and compellingly presented, so not sure what you mean.

**Captain Trips** · 07-06-2011

I read the entire post.

While your analysis of both moore and this wilson cat seems fair enough, your own political preferences come through loud and clear.

Not really a criticism, just pointing it out. I would take the time and watch and offer my own views, if I had the time right now. Got to keep my priorities in order at the moment.

Moore is like Gore, he definitely has an agenda and he isn't really great at presenting it well to a well rounded audience - that's all I can offer currently on the entire topic.

**Hoplite** · 07-06-2011

Originally Posted by CharlesDavenport

A cogent point is by definition well and compellingly presented, so not sure what you mean.

He presents information on issues that could be used to make very compelling points, but that gets lost in his presentation.

Originally Posted by Captain Trips

I read the entire post.

While your analysis of both moore and this wilson cat seems fair enough, your own political preferences come through loud and clear.

Well, they really, especially when I spelled out that I agree with some of Moore's positions. I never claimed to be completely objective, just as objective as possible.