Jump to content

Michael Moore


Controlled Chaos
 Share

Recommended Posts

Michael Moore, smear specialist

Brent Bozell

 

May 7, 2004

 

It was awarded the status of top news, the front page of The New York Times. Disney was telling its Miramax subsidiary that it could not distribute radical, Bush-loathing Michael Moore's new "mockumentary," titled "Fahrenheit 9-11." This report, like virtually all the news accounts surrounding Moore's upcoming film, seem to glide right around Moore's very obvious hatred of conservatives and his very checkered history of cinematic fact-mangling.

 

The first act of fact-mangling on this film may be this story of Disney censorship. In paragraph six of the Times story, we were given a Disney spokesman declaring they "advised both the agent and Miramax in May of 2003 that the film would not be distributed by Miramax."

 

Stop right there. May of 2003? This was not news to Michael Moore. This was not a story for page one ... or page 30. It's simply not "news," period. How to make it news? It appears the scoop was that Moore flack Ari Emanuel claimed he had a conversation with Disney chairman Michael Eisner, who said he feared all the Bush-bashing might endanger the company's tax breaks in Florida, since the state is led by Gov. Jeb Bush.

 

Big news, right? Except Disney denies Eisner said this. Gov. Bush's office proclaimed the conspiracy theory "ludicrous." And Moore has a history of nutty accusations. So why on earth is the Times tooting Moore's horn?

 

The timing and theme of this story reek of Cheap Promotionalism. Why does this publicity debut match the eve of the film's debut at the Cannes Film Festival, where the European pseudo-sophisticates will no doubt laud all the butchered Bush-bashing? The title of Moore's film invites immediate comparison to "Fahrenheit 451," the 1953 Ray Bradbury science-fiction tale of firemen who don't fight fires but start fires burning books. The endlessly self-impressed Moore is no doubt suggesting that courageous leftist men of ideas are being censored by the ignorant and malignant post-9-11 trauma-exploiting Dubya Dynasty. Moore needs this movie to be censored somehow, or else his tale of American oppression is empty. Some concocted conspiracy of censorship is now part of its marketing plan.

 

Is this Moore mudbath really in danger of not hitting theaters? Think again. In 1995, Miramax prepared to distribute Larry Clark's unrated, unpretty teen sex film "Kids," but Disney would not release an unrated film. So the Miramax brass released it through a separate company, Shining Excalibur Films. There's nothing stopping them from doing it again, and they will.

 

The other obvious fact-mangling involves the allegation that somehow, the Bush Dynasty secretly loves the Saudi Dynasty, which spawned the 9-11 terrorists. Moore laid his conspiracy theory out on HBO to Bob Costas a year ago. In Moore's fever swamp, the Bush team knows that Osama bin Laden is hiding out in Saudi Arabia, and they're hiding him so they can exploit the terror trauma. "He's back living with his sponsors, his benefactors ... I think the United States, I think our government knows where he is, and I don't think we're going to be capturing him or killing him any time soon." Cue the "Twilight Zone" music. We're off to Cuckoo-land.

 

The film reportedly contains an interview with author Craig Unger, who has a new book out on the supposedly ironclad relationship between the "House of Bush" and the House of Saud. But Unger's history of anti-Bush bunk goes back to the first Bush presidency, when he wrote a long "investigative" piece for Esquire magazine claiming that only an idiot couldn't see the "October Surprise" conspiracy.

 

Remember that fairy tale, about how the treasonous Reagan-Bush campaign in 1980 nefariously plotted to delay the release of the American hostages in Iran so that Ronald Reagan could be elected president? Even the liberal Columbia Journalism Review blasted Unger's politicized sloppiness, suggesting they would give his work a C-minus for slim evidence. But that only makes him a perfect foil for Michael Moore, the master of fictional "nonfiction" documentaries.

 

Politically, the worst thing about this is that the media elite can't seem to call Michael Moore even a "liberal," let alone a radical nutcase. (Here's a guy fired from Mother Jones magazine for being too far left! In addition to being personally unbearable, he refused to run an article that criticized the Sandinista communists then oppressing Nicaragua.) But reporters have actually allowed Moore to claim that his upcoming film, designed for a fall release, is not partisan. Moore is so full of beans that he even claimed, "This is not an anti-Bush diatribe."

 

If you buy that, buy a ticket to the film. And remember: Bush is hiding Osama. Pass it on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

michael moore is a hack. same with al franken. they like their paychecks too much, so they have to continue to push buttons and make "news" up. (think: Foxnews with dreads, too much ganja, a box of twinkies, and the same fact checkers)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael Moore is such a freaking moron. I dont know how anyone can actually take him seriously. And by the way, I4E, Apu doesnt like Moore. At least thats what he said during a convo over PMs one time. Just letting you know so maybe this doesnt turn into another "event" lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be very good to see the film when it comes out, hopefully in the summer to help along the US regime change slated for November.

 

The Shining Excalibur distribution analogy from the article is not completely apt (but I get the point), as the issue with "Kids" was a ratings issue and all major studios are MPAA signatories to their rating system. That's why Indies can put out unrated films rather than getting saddled with the NC-17 kiss of death, but major releases cannot. Here, it's not a ratings issue, but depending on who owns the rights to the film, sure, some distribution arrangement can be worked out.

 

And I don't know the ownership details and that worries me. If Miramax actually owns the film and Disney is pulling the Mirimax strings, then they can keep the film from being released, at least until after the election. It sounds like the heads at Mirimax are on Moore's side so that part is good.

 

Mirimax and Moore's agent may well have been informed a year ago that Disney would keep Mirimax from distributing the film. But you have to make the film before you worry about its release and a story about a company blocking the release of a film that may or may not get made is not much of the story. And the timing would not have been as good, from the standpoint of getting the film in the press before Cannes. I'm sure it will do very well there, hopefully it does.

 

As far as Moore's mudslinging, it is obvious that he's a Bush-basher. There can never be enough of those. I'd personally have rather seen this film project been a closer approximation of "Dude, Where's my Country," because I'm more interested in a lot of that than I am in the Saudi/Bush and Bush/bin Laden connections. But, if Moore's mudslinging amounted to nothing more than a pack of unsubstantiated lies aimed at Bush and others, he'd be getting his ass sued left and right over it. It's not happening. So far the only libel suit against him I know of was brought by Terry Nichols' brother because Bowling For Columbine 'portrayed him in a bad light.' But as far as fact-checking, Moore and his team do a much better job than, say, the CIA, or this Administration.

 

Moore is not an intellectual, he does smoke-and-mirrors stuff with statistics I dislike (no worse than anyone who's selling you something, but not exactly rigorous application either) in order to use them to make a point, and he is a master of cheap shots. As a documentarian, he's no Ken Burns. But he doesn't have to be. Hopefully his film gets out this summer. Bush backers will stay away from it and it won't change their minds. Bush bashers will see it and our minds are already made up. Hopefully a lot of fence-sitters see it and it swings them away from Bush, so if the film accomplished that it will have served its purpose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael Moore is such a freaking moron. I dont know how anyone can actually take him seriously. And by the way, I4E, Apu doesnt like Moore. At least thats what he said during a convo over PMs one time. Just letting you know so maybe this doesnt turn into another "event" lol.

The above points notwithstanding, I like Moore. Both sides need their vocal curmudgeons, and this one has a pretty good, black sense of humor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Moore, but I'm wary of him at the same time. He got Nike to change some of their hiring practices after ripping into Phil Knight in I think it was, "The Big One." But he also manipulates facts and exaggerates things to get his point across, and that makes me trust him less. If the subjects he covers are as bad as he claims them to be, then the truth should be plenty enough, and he shouldn't need to do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

while moore may be over the top, i agree, we need more people like him who speak up and care about what happens to the little guy. "roger and me" and "bowling for columbine" were two movies that touched sensitive topics. being from michigan, i have seen first-hand what an absolute s***hole Flint has become since GM shut down buick city. that city is in absolute RUIN and there is really no light at the end of the tunnel. the city is perenially broke, the streets are crumbling, unemployment is out of this world, and i wouldn't let my best friend walk the streets of flint at night. moore is angry, and rightfully so, at the lack of corporate accountability in today's economy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

while moore may be over the top, i agree, we need more people like him who speak up and care about what happens to the little guy. "roger and me" and "bowling for columbine" were two movies that touched sensitive topics. being from michigan, i have seen first-hand what an absolute s***hole Flint has become since GM shut down buick city. that city is in absolute RUIN and there is really no light at the end of the tunnel. the city is perenially broke, the streets are crumbling, unemployment is out of this world, and i wouldn't let my best friend walk the streets of flint at night. moore is angry, and rightfully so, at the lack of corporate accountability in today's economy.

good post, Ob -

 

there are some really sick radical nut jobs out there that some folks here never mention

 

radical nut job not Michael Moore

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael Moore is a genius IMO for his work in the movie "Bowling for Columbine." Being a freshman in high school I did not know of all our government being corrupted. I learned history repeated itself, and we gave Osama money to kill those poor civilians. (correct me if i'm wrong) And giving Saddam money. Both of these are used against us, so what the heck is wrong with us? Mercy. We are a corrupt government. God I hope Bush is out of here, because I can't stand war. I will not go to war. I will run away from it; I don't care about the act of ambandoning my country, I do not cease to die. I sease to live my life fully, to liberty and to the persuit of my own happiness. Maybe September 11th was a fluke. Maybe Bush wanted us to die. He knew and he never told us. What the hell is that? Screw Clinton as well. We should of had Dole and Gore in office. Would Gore have been a better president? Time will tell. God help our souls if Bush wins the next election. Mercy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ooooo.  OOOOO.... Ohhh. Ohhhhhh... I know I know I know!

:lol:

the site was given to me by Apu -

 

he thought a mirror to your post would be interesting and I obliged

 

he thought it was crap too when it was meant at him

 

me,. I'm just the messeger boy here who has an opinion but doesn't give it until after he's tipped! ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the site was given to me by Apu -

 

he thought a mirror to your post would be interesting and I obliged

 

he thought it was crap too when it was meant at him

 

me,. I'm just the messeger boy here who has an opinion but doesn't give it until after he's tipped! ;)

Apu needs to get his ass back here. Period. He is too important to this site to be marginalized.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the site was given to me by Apu -

 

he thought a mirror to your post would be interesting and I obliged

 

he thought it was crap too when it was meant at him

 

me,. I'm just the messeger boy here who has an opinion but doesn't give it until after he's tipped! ;)

zeig hail....

 

 

 

 

always new kerry-heinz was a nazi...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael Moore is a smegma-raking satirist. He does/used to do the dirty work nobody else on the left would touch. I could care less for him personally, but I am smart enough appreciate the role he plays.

 

R&M was pretty good and BfC, while not Sorrow and Pity, certainly had its moments, even if ultimately the subject matter is too complex for him to answer the questions he poses. Meh.

 

Plus he makes me laugh, which is always good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the site was given to me by Apu -

 

he thought a mirror to your post would be interesting and I obliged

 

he thought it was crap too when it was meant at him

 

me,. I'm just the messeger boy here who has an opinion but doesn't give it until after he's tipped! ;)

oh for crying out loud. It was a joke. Get over it. And your post wasn't. That's the difference. And seriously, I like reading Apu's side of things. It keeps things in balance on here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael Moore is a smegma-raking satirist. He does/used to do the dirty work nobody else on the left would touch.    I could care less for him personally, but I am smart enough appreciate the role he plays.

 

R&M was pretty good and BfC, while not Sorrow and Pity, certainly had its moments, even if ultimately the subject matter is too complex for him to answer the questions he poses.  Meh.

 

Plus he makes me laugh, which is always good.

Whatsorts of tools does one use when smegma raking?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael Moore is a smegma-raking satirist. He does/used to do the dirty work nobody else on the left would touch.    I could care less for him personally, but I am smart enough appreciate the role he plays.

 

R&M was pretty good and BfC, while not Sorrow and Pity, certainly had its moments, even if ultimately the subject matter is too complex for him to answer the questions he poses.  Meh.

 

Plus he makes me laugh, which is always good.

Brando...were you at the Boone reunion 2 weeks ago?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...