An uncomfortable truth – Film – Entertainment – theage.com.au — This is an interesting article. This couple did a documentary about their hero Michael Moore and discovered some ugly truths.
Then the Toronto-based couple tried to do a documentary about him – and ran into the same sort of resistance Moore famously faces in his own films.
The result is Manufacturing Dissent, which turns the camera on the confrontational documentarian and examines some of his methods.
Among their revelations in the movie, which had its world premiere at the South by Southwest film festival this month: that Moore did speak with then-General Motors chairman Roger Smith, the evasive subject of his 1989 debut Roger & Me, but chose to withhold that footage from the final cut.
found by TJ Geezer
ummm and we’re supposed to be surprised by this “news”?
Uncomfortable indeed. I like his work and I was disappointed to learn that, according to the article, he is in fact more of an a-hole and a jerk than I thought. Well, now I need to decide what is better or worse: a likable guy with a terrible performance (think of GW, for example) or a jerk whose work makes a positive difference for all of us (Clinton, Gore, Moore, etc.).
I appreciate his work. I also know to take everything these days with the “I don’t believe this is for MY good” attitude.
I think his subjects need to be discussed. Just not sure that he should ‘avoid’ the truth when conveying the message.
But, the truth doesn’t sell too well these days it would appear. People want Drama. Rather than honest reporting.
This is their 4th try at doing the same thing Moore does – muckraking on video. The others pretty much flopped. Maybe this will be a hot enough topic for them to make as many dollar$ as MM?
I’m a Micheal Moore fan — especially TV Nation — but I agree with lakelady. Is this really a surprise to anyone?
Who thinks Michael Moore is either fair or balanced? Does he claim so? Micheal Moore is the closest we libs have to Fox News.
Fox claims to be a “balance” to CNN, New York Times, etc. but that’s nonsense. Those guys try to be fair and balanced. Fox doesn’t even try.
The equivalent of Fox on the left is Michael Moore… not CNN or the New York Times.
Yeah, and weren’t these guys on the daily show and didn’t michael moore actually show up to help the daily show make fun of them?
Fox claims to be a “balance” to CNN, New York Times, etc. but that’s nonsense. Those guys try to be fair and balanced. Fox doesn’t even try.
The New York Times tries to be fair and balanced? Don’t make me laugh. CNN maybe.
Moore may have not trusted their intentions so he avoided them. They got pissed and made a stink. I’m not saying that is what happened, but it is something to think about.
#8 – You could say pretty much the same thing about anyone Moore has ‘documenti-fried’.
I find his work highly slanted, polarizing, inflammatory, and cut to prove his point and his point only.
I don’t feel he put documentary film makers on the map. He put documentary film makers with a strong political agenda on the map. By crafting his films as he does, he puts himself in a worse light than those he portrays as the bad guys.
By the way, I think Clinton was an intelligent, articulate, considerate person that was generally good for the country except for two things. His minor character flaw (present in many people men who like power) and his wife.
It just reminds us that you can’t take what someone says as the 100% full story. You can’t take Micheal Moore’s movies at face value the same way you can’t take Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth at face value.
Its a lot more work, but after you see a story that gets you thinking, you have to do more research yourself to make sure you got the whole story. And really, the more complicated a story, the less cut-and-dry the conclusion will be.
C’mon KagatoAMV … cheap shot at Al Gore!
I haven’t seen Inconvenient Truth but it has to be more fair than any Michael Moore film.
As a liberal I won’t apologize for Moore until conservatives start apologizing for Fox.
But, unlike Fox, I’ll honestly admit that Moore is not at all fair and balanced.
What galls me is that the guy does a big doc about how he cannot meet Roger Smith. He meets him more than once but stays with his premise that he cannot meet him. This is not then a documentary. It’s a drama. Fake like reality TV.
He should be ineligible for an academy award for documentaries if he isn’t actually doing them. Will he give back his Oscar???
gquaglia,
The Judith Miller scandal showing that she was propoganda tool for the Whitehouse proves that the New York times isn’t the liberal rag the conservatives claim it to be.
John,
You hit the most indefensible point, exactly. It’s beyond a slant or a bias — it violates the main premise of his film.
By the way, are you sure this is a valid claim about Moore?
This story has swiftboaty smell to it. if Roger Smith really DID meet with Michael Moore why didn’t he say so when the movie was in the theaters? That was the time to say something — not more than a decade later.
Frank Zappa once said that the single most important thing that he taught his children was that “the man on the television is trying to sell you something”. I suggest that everyone apply the same level of rigorous skepticism to this film, Michael Moore’s films and everything else for that matter.
#17 hibiscusroto
Best post yet. Any time Frank Zappa is mentioned.
How many of you have seen the movie. Raise your hands. Oh no hands are up. Isn’t that interesting?
“the man on the television is trying to sell you something”
I like it, but would also add:
The men from government are also trying to sell you something…
“Where from the government and we are here to help”
NO Thanks, we have all the government we need!
Michael Moore is an asshole.
#10 – I find his work highly slanted, polarizing, inflammatory, and cut to prove his point and his point only.
Cut to his point? What did you expect? What do you people think documentaries are?
No really… I’m not asking you what you want documentary to mean… I’m asking what it actually does mean, and keep in mind that I know the answer and it is not a film that shows a factual representation of objective facts on an issue.
Koyannasquatsi is a documentary. Thin Blue Line is a documentary. Roger and Me is a documentary. Look at Wiseman’s High School or Titticut Follies… how “factual” are these? What about Salesman?
Instead of writing editorials about topics, Moore films them, and they are very effective. The truth of the filmmaker’s personal point of view is not betrayed by pendantic rants about the details of the narrative. Roger and Me is in fact loaded with well documented shifts in the timeline of events as they happened and as they are shown. Moore compresses a 5 to 7 year period (not including historical footage) into a 2 year time frame, all to serve a compelling narrative (which is not synonomous with fiction) about how GE is displacing workers, destroying the economy of an American town, and outsourcing jobs to foriegn countries… which was all true and raised important issues with audiences that may not have had the issues on their minds previously…
…and it is somewhat disingenious to complain that Moore, a documentarian, who is also a satyrist and social commentator, and who is publicly and unapologetically political and partisan… it is disingenious to complain that he isn’t straddling a center line and presenting facts like we expect from a newspaper or magazine article.
Huh?
Roger Smith DID say he met with more back them, GregA. He’s told anyone who asked over the years the same story – he met with and was filmed by Michael Moore.
Why didn’t MOORE tell the truth? That;s the real question here, not your attempt to label it as “swiftboaty.”
“22.
Huh?
Comment by John C Dvorak — 3/16/2007 @ 10:14 am”
I’m detecting a pattern. Whenever somebody does Dvorak’s thinking for him and presents a refutation of his comments, he plays dumb and, metaphorically, throws his hands in the air on the topic.
There’s really nothing complicated about OhForTheLoveOf’s point (I agree with it by the way), which basically explains away a lot of misconceptions people seem to have.
In any case, if only nice guys were able to editorialize, then Dvorak would be out of business.
To wit, my (extremely un)scientific study:
http://www.google.com/search?q=dvorak+asshole&ie=UTF-8
53,100 hits.
To be fair, Dvorak is only 1/5 as much of an asshole as Moore (or 1/5 as well known):
http://tinyurl.com/23occ3
258,000 hits.
#24, Moore and Smith? Can you back that up because it sure is news to me. I saw Roger and Me well over ten years ago.
As I recall, after the film was released, Smith met Moore to discuss some aspects of the film, that part was well publicized, but not before. Of coarse, if you can cite an actual source that confirms your version I will accept it.
I say this is just another swift boating.
as I discovered when working for a mail order clothing company: FMAJ (Fat Men Aren’t Jolly). The rudest of the rude are guys with waists over 50 inches!! Holy crap, they are downright a-holes. Demanding, and arrogant. They’re always asking “do you know who I am??” like anyone gives a flying snot rocket about it. (I was eventually fired for asking “No. Exactly who do YOU think you are?” one too many times.)
Evidently Moore fits the bill. No surprise there.
The more important question is… who cares? I’d rather see the March of the Penguins guy (what is his name anyway) get press.
Moore is trying too hard to get anyone to fawn over him, and by being an a-hole, it’s just a louder cry for press and attention. Ignore him.
#25
Can’t let John lose against Michael in Google stats. At least he wins this one:
“Michael Moore is Nuts” – 4 hits
“John C. Dvorak is Nuts” – 190 hits
John is 47.5 times more nuts than Michael. Steve Jobs must be happy to hear this. 🙂
#28, maybe you just vindicated Mrs Dvorak’s opinion.
Greg Allen is the James Hill of the left. And Mr. Fusion is his usual self when you cite anything that wasn’t gleaned from one of his favorite unbiased sites, like the Daily Kos, or Moveon.org…..the screams of ****show me links, show me proof**** fill the air.
News flash you guys….Liberals are jerks and a-holes as well as right wingers…..get over it.
#30 – Not true. I mean yes, there are plenty of “jerks and a-holes” (when did we stop using the letter “s”?) on the right, so I agree with that part of your statement. But you’d have to dig pretty deep to find people like that on the left.
I mean there was that one guy in college who kept showing up to the weekly gathering of “The Flag Burning, America Hating, Gay and Pedophile Loving Students For A Pinko Commie Way” – but he was just there for the chicks. As for myself, I liked the politics and even served a year on the “Steal From The Rich and Waste It On Minorities and Illegal Aliens Sub-Committee” but mostly I enjoyed the ritual Feast Of Fetuses Spring Kegger…
WOOOOOO GO BERKELEY!!!!!!!!!!!
Every time I’ve met with Michael Moore, I’ve found him warm, gracious, and sincere.
Calling Moore a documentarian is an insult to all real documentary film makers. The man is an out and out liar, a propagandist and a hypocrite.
Since An Inconvenient Truth was mentioned: That file is also complete propaganda based on a bad approximation of science. Don’t take my word for it. If that statement were false, why are there no so many top notch climatologists, not on the big oil payroll, either coming out against Mr. Gore’s little religion or even leaving the flock, that even the mainstream media has had to start paying attention?