|smoothbrain - 2007-07-10 |
I haven't seen it yet, but I love it when Michael Moore gets mad.
|Lindner - 2007-07-10 |
Amazing... on the one hand, I agree with most of the points Moore made. On the other hand, he's such a smug, rambling, pursecuted chuckle-fuck, I want to kick his teeth in. I see why he's a filmmaker and not a public speaker.
He thinks he's edited for his inflammatory statements, but I would claim it's more likely they're trying to cull out the extraneous rambling bullshit. He can't even stick to the issue, when it's HIS topic!
Someone should put together a drinking game for every Michael Moore appearance. Take a shot every time he tells a doctor or a professional journalist, "You didn't do your job!"
See, I sort of agree with you... on the one hand you can hardly blame the guy for getting angry about his treatment like this after the fahrenheit 9/11 thing. But on the other hand it doesn't really do anyone any good when he visibly loses his cool.
I don't think this deserves a one-star after seeing the piece he's responding to, though. It really seems to stretch its facts to make the point it seems to be trying to make - which is that socialized health care doesn't work.
Someone needs to send Michael Moore some tapes of Frank Zappa on Crossfire as a sort of "Keep Your Cool" training.
P.S.: People should learn to stop one starring material because they don't agree with it.
As I said, I agree with him on many of the points. I've always agreed with them. The first twenty times he said it. I don't LIKE this interview, on either side. I don't feel I came away with any new information (I.E. Moore ranting how he was right, and how the media isn't doing it's job), nor was I entertained. Frankly I want my ten minutes back.
Thusly I ranked it one star.
Sorry, pal. I don't know who the hell you are in the first place, let alone why you believe you're in a position to teach me how to rate something based on my own opinion. But thanks just the same.
|StanleyPain - 2007-07-10 |
I don't like Moore much either, but in this case, I think he earned his tantrum. Basically they were going to have him on to discuss the film and all that, but then before they had him on, Wolf did this obvious fucking hitpiece on him. The segment was referred to as "REALITY CHECK", automatically asserting that Moore is not "in reality", and then further made claims directly on-air that Moore altered stastistics and facts in his film, without citing ANY sources or any proof otherwise, tantamounting to libel.
Oh, and I forgot to point out exactly how calculated the Reality Check piece is. Rather than make up false statistics and then say Moore got it wrong, what they did for most of the segment is cite the CORRECT facts and numbers (which Moore did, in fact, get correct) then say they were wrong in the film (which they aren't). If that isn't a Fox News-level trick, I dunno what is. So, basically, CNN and presumably Blitzer, wanted to make Moore look like a dumbass, but in a way that would give them plausible deniability so that when Moore eventually pointed out the asshattery, they could just pull some "OOPS OUR BAD" thing. So, again, this can't be an "I don't like Michael Moore" issue...ignore Moore...the real issue is that CNN purposefully engineered this and it keeps getting worse.
Yep. How much money do you think CNN makes from advertising by big pharma, insurance companies, etc. This is obviously a calculated move to discredit the film, but CNN is terrible anyway, and anyone who gets their news from them is screwed from the get-go.
|baleen - 2007-07-10 |
I have to echo the mixed feelings here.
I have a lot of problems with Moore's films (Roger & Me being the one exception) , but the kind of anger that Moore is putting out there is real and I believe deserved. The question is, does it damage his cause to have these tantrums? I don't think so at this point. The difference between Moore and Coulter, Limbaugh and other pundits is that while he approaches his subject matter with anger and a large amount of equivocation , underlying it all is a very deep and real compassion for the suffering people he is representing.
While I was watching this I felt a lot of the anger he did. The media dropped the ball on the war and on everything else. I just find it hard to watch, it makes me nauseated to see this kind of discourse in general.
Moore freaks out when he's maliciously and purposefully misrepresented to prove somebody else's whacked-out, unfounded point. Meanwhile, I am having flashbacks to pretty much the entirety of Bowling for Columbine. Tub-o-butter doesn't like it when the shoe's on the other foot.
|halon - 2007-07-10 |
Tears of butter
Oh wow, another Michael Moore fat joke. My sides...
It was really a joke about how he sounded like he was about to cry when he really started getting into it. The fat was just a prop.
If you look closely though, you will see that he is in fact quite large.
|Xiphias - 2007-07-10 |
I think he's right to be fucked pissed off.
|voodoo_pork - 2007-07-10 |
Note: I give this a 5-star rating mainly for the importance of this clip, rather than agreeing with its content.
This kind of televised trainwreck obviously attracts a lot of attention from both political sides, ala the Jerry Springer Effect. Several question about the clip arise.
Does Moore deserve to be so pissed about an obvious attack piece RIGHT before his interview? Yes, obviously yes. It's an attack on his integrity.
Does he conduct himself in a professional manner? Probably not. But I think the proximity of the attack clip excuses that a little bit. Not a lot, but it's at least understandable. Imagine if it happened to you. How would you react?
Should Moore have taped the further questions Wolf Blitzer had prepared? Yes, it would be very appropriate. I understand Moore's reluctance to tape, mainly due to the magic of video editing and context shifting. But he really leaves his words hanging out there, and an angry, ill-tempered response doesn't result in a constructive argument (i.e. screaming match), especially about something as important as health care.
I think it's been proven in the last 7 years that "constructive argument" doesn't fucking work. It's time to get pissed off and cause trouble.
|Smellvin - 2007-07-10 |
I'd recommend that people watch a documentary on how easy it is to be disingenuous in documentaries. It even points out a few major problems with Moore's previous films. It's called "Michael Moore Hates America" (yes, it's a caustic title meant to grab your attention; no, it's not what the title makes it sound like).
|dancingshadow - 2007-07-10 |
I like his honest anger. I thought that was well said.
|ABoyNamedCheese - 2007-07-10 |
HI I'M JOE RIGHT-LEANING AND EVERY 5 MOTHERFUCKING SECONDS I JOKE ABOUT MOORE BEING A FAT GUY. FURTHERMORE, MISTER MOORE IS FAT. FAT. LAUGH NOW. COME ON. LAUGH AT THE MOST OBVIOUS AESTHETIC INSECURITY HE HAS. JOIN ME ON MY HIGH HORSE BY LAUGHING AT FAT MAN FOREVER. OOPS ITS BEEN 5 SECONDS: TEARS OF BUTTER FROM MOORE.
IN THAT HE IS PORTLY FAT HOG HAM MAN OF BACON FACE.
(crickets chirp conspicuously)
Why do I have to disagree with him to make fun of the fact that he's a rotund fellow on the verge of tears during some points of this interview? I saw Sicko and thought it was a great movie, and agreed with pretty much everything he said here.
Sorry to rain on your parade, mister insecurity. But hey, I'm sure you're just showing solidarity or something.
Shut up, faggot. I hate Moore with a fiery passion, and I lean pretty goddamned far to the left.
ALSO HE IS PRETTY FUCKING FAT, YOU HAVE TO ADMIT.
|Rudy - 2007-07-10 |
While I hate Michael Moore because he is a traitorous piece of dogshit who should die and go to Hell like the wretched little faggot motherfucking asshole, smarmy pretentious douchebag drama queen dickface he is, but every now and then he DOES makes some good points.
I mean I don't want to sound like I'm supporting his movies, which are obviously lieberal nazi propaganda degenerate hate speech which should be banned in every state for being a bunch of obvious lies propagated by a child molesting, FAT fucking smelly prick, but I do agree with everything they say.
Also, how do you get the videos to play? Do you have to change your cookie settings or something?
I'm not sure if you intended for this comment to be comedy gold, but it was. I think it's the last couple tech support sentences that ties the room together.
Trolling should be subtle, not in-your-face.
|Ryo-Cokey - 2007-07-10 |
I dunno what's better, Moore's righteous indignation at being caught quickly cutting away from Cuba's rank on the list, his essentially admitting the point about elective procedures was correct, or his picking the Human Development Report figures when more recent numbers clearly show Cuba's expectancy below the US.
It's all unintentional comedy gold. But hey, it was 1, not !
Oh man! Human Development Report figures show Cuba's expectancy BELOW the U.S.? UNINTENTIONAL HILARIOUSNESS ABOUNDS!!!!
You must throw some bitchin' parties, Ryo!
It was 1, not !
Thanks, Ryo, for bringing that into perspective.
Moore never told us that while the US gets ranked 27th by the WHO, Cuba was ranked 28th.
Of course, he also failed to mention that the US has the number 1 GNP, at .3 trillion, while Cuba, at billion, is ranked somewhere around negative 22.
Cuba ranks lower. That still means we pay an insane amount of money for health care one notch above fucking cuba even though we are the richest nation on the planet and they are not even close. Cuba is doing the best they can with their resources and we are doing a little more than absolutely nothing.
|Old_Zircon - 2007-07-10 |
I second the Zappa comment above.
|futurebot - 2007-07-10 |
I have no idea what kind of bizarre standard the critics are holding Moore to here, but Blitzer is a dismissive, patronizing, passive-aggressive disingenuous prick here and not only does Moore have every right to be angry - I would EXPECT him to be angry, and I'm glad he was.
I mean, Christ, if you want some kind of civil, detached argument against the war or in favor of universal health care, it's out there. The facts are out there, the books are out there, the advocates are out there, and they've all been out there for years.
|Xenocide - 2007-07-10 |
I gave Moore shit for his previous rant (well-deserved shit), but he's on the money here. CNN were being a bunch of pricks. This afternoon they reran most of his rant and it was introduced as "Michael Moore ranting and raving" and then after the clip the anchorwoman followed up with a dismissive chuckle and a "well, that was Moore's wacky tirade, tune in tonight to see Blitzer respond live. Because responding to a recording that can't give counterarguments is a fair way to debate."
I mean, it's pretty fucking telling when Blitzer's best counterpunch is "well, we ran commercials for your movie!" Yeah, I'm sure those were done in the interest of equality and not because the studio paid for the ad time like everyone else.
|Senator_Unger - 2007-07-10 |
So, we're only allowed to show anger when foreign terrorists murder innocent civilians but we have to "play nice" when our own government, through inaction and incompetence is unable to provide healthcare for 50 million Americans, resulting in thousands of their deaths each year? Moore said the amount of people who die each year was the equivalent of six 9/11s. So, take the rage you felt over 9/11, multiply it by six and that should be an appropriate level of anger for this discourse.
|Frostilicus - 2007-07-10 |
I GOT AN OPINION ON MICHAEL MOORE!!!!!!!
YOU ARE FAT
|phalsebob - 2007-07-10 |
How was this out of line?
I'll tell you who needs his ass kicked. Wolf Blitzer and his fucking beard.
|PegLegPete - 2007-07-10 |
9/11 TIMES 100! But seriously I cannot disagree with Moore other than the way he presents himself. "Socialized medicine" is the future and should be. If government is supposed to protect us it should maintain our health. And only partially if taxes are that big of a fucking deal. If money really matters to people and those who run this country we'd be forced to find ways to cut the costs of providing health care to ourselves (kinda strange isn't it?). Maybe we'd figure out that education is vitally important to a country and improve it, specifically medical education. Eventually people might, dare I say, learn to take care of themselves, eat more healthy food and exercise. We'd become smarter and have more energy to do whatever it is we do. But of course that would shake much of the economic stability of this country, or would it shift it? I can't say for sure but heres to hoping our (the USA) culture changes sometime soon or we'll have a majority of fat, lazy, ignorant morons to vote and take care of the environment.
There needs to be a debate channel for this kind of stuff. It might exist in the form of c-span already but that's not enough. So much could be gained with several networks dedicated to education and solving social and economic problems, religion and philosophy with a host of writers, government workers, scholars, teachers, doctors etc... Just educated people to talk to each other and an audience and callers and address even e-mails. If smart marketers got behind the network it'd be unstoppable, maybe the American Idol of, you know, knowing shit. But that not as important as money...
|Camonk - 2007-07-11 |
Making Wolf Blitzer look like an idiot is a lot like kicking a kitten. It's really easy, but come on man leave that kitten alone. Everybody knows Wolf is a tool. Making him look like a tool is just gratuitous.
Making Dr. Sanjay Gupta sound like a tool is a bit better.
|Spit Spingola - 2007-07-12 |
Dr. Gupta's report was fucked up beyond words. It think Moore didn't expect to have his film attacked right from the getgo either.
|Daughters of Uzbek - 2007-11-16 |
Your reviews are bias. Once I get my copy of Rune I will write a review that rips his review apart piece by piece.
|FABIO2 - 2007-11-28 |
So what happened to CNN? New management? Or is it simply a matter trying to "compete" with FOX's ratings?
| Register or login To Post a Comment|