Is Michael Moore the best political documentary filmmaker alive? The only criticism I ever see of him is the obvious (he's fat) and that his editing techniques sometimes manipulate and compress time in favor of his argument (a standard of documentary filmmaking). Has anyone seen Where to Invade Next? I thought it was breddy gud but also made me wonder why I live in such a shithole country and to jump ship, which I think was the opposite of what he intended to convey (which was, instead, America can be great and we can fix it).
>>63636083
He's definitely one of the best.
Moretti is bretty gud desu
>>63636641
Any recommendations for Moretti?
>>63636083
How about the fact his 'documentaries' are not very factual?
>>63636743
Other than the facts and sources he lists in the credits and on his website?
Have you seen Where to Invade Next? Are these people just making up their personal experiences (weeks paid vacation, amenities in prisons, the Norwegian prison intro video singing "We are the World", etc.)? Is it not factual cause it goes against your political leanigs, anon?
>>63636083
Bowling for columbine was the last one i can remember watching. But being from detroit Roger and Me really struck a nerve.
He also had a great short lived show on fox ages ago.
>>63636772
>Mr. Moore is more of a propagandist, and while most of what he portrays is technically true his editing and narrative are in large part misleading. It's the old chestnut of whether an omission is actually a lie, and I believe it is a lie if what's omitted creates false impressions.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-russnow/michael-moores-where-to-i_b_8781292.html
>>63636831
>Michael Moore is a documentary filmmaker
That's literally all I got out of that paragraph.
>>63636831
Moore even says in WTIN that he's only here to 'pick the flowers, not the weeds'. He admits that he's forming a narrative. Have you ever watched a documentary before?
Also
>Huffpost
LOL
Very little information has been published about this so far, but I suppose he will just travel around Europe and show people (niggers, muslims and assorted trash) living in luxury funded by hard working taxpayers and being given all sorts of special rights and goodies and say that's a good system that needs to be replicated in America.
Sometimes I wonder if Moore is just a master troll and his actual message is to show how skewed socialism actually is.
>>63636083
"political documentary" is merely step above from those "eye-opening" image collections stormfags use to spread their neurosis
git a real job michael
>>63636772
>Are these people just making up their personal experiences
No. Their experiences are very real but it doesn't mean they're good for society.
>weeks paid vacation
Irrelevant. Income is lower and taxes are higher in Europe. Paid vacation is a stupidity created to pander to dumbfucks who are too stupid to plan their own lives. If you work in the US you have more disposable income and if you really want a nice vacation you can easily save money during the year and go on unpaid vacation when you wish. What happens in Europe is we delegate that task to the state and the employer and as a result we're poorer and less productive.
>amenities in prisons
How is that a good thing?
>the Norwegian prison intro video singing "We are the World"
Scandinavian countries a re a haven of impunity. Leftists suddenly realized that when they saw Breivik will only be in a prison that looks more like a hotel for 21 years and then he will be free and live until he is 95 and publish books, give interviews and be rich. They went into full damage control and desperately tried to find a way to lock him up for good by introducing new laws etc. It was hilarious to see "progressives" having a taste of their own flawed justice when they were the victims.
>>63636083
>and that his editing techniques sometimes manipulate and compress time in favor of his argument (a standard of documentary filmmaking)
low-quality bait.jpg
Adam Curtis gets my nod as best.
>>63636083
>Where to Invade Next?
what? Mike has another documentary out?
>>63637922
It's been so long since the last one, and there's two hawks running for office. Perfect time to do an anti-imperialist doc. But I'm sure he'll fuck it up somehow.
>>63636831
>there's no doubt his films strike a populist chord
>Michael Moore is populist
no, he just exposes the real consequences in a level people can relate.
I bet if you told someone in Huffpost that you thought Trump is a populist, they 'd say "sure he is, no doubt! but so is Michael".
The golden centre theory.
About the food in France:
>Clearly Moore goes overboard when to prove his point he pulls forth a coke and offers it to a horrified boy, who refuses to touch it. A braver female classmate downs the beverage with a shrug, but why does Moore imply Coca Cola is shunned in France?
>It's sold in most supermarkets, and while the French cafeteria cook exclaims he's never had a hamburger, there are McDonald's throughout the country and one prominently on the Champs-Elysee. Other such establishments exist, including Subway, Chipotle and Burger King. According to NPR, fast food comprises 54% of all French restaurant sales.
Very good point, but that doesn't mean the food culture in Europe isn't generally more hostile to fast food.
The article proceeds to give some numbers on the taxation and health coverage of Germans and French. They compare this taxation to the u.s. taxation, always for public insurance, only to conclude:
> Health coverage not covered by a job can be expensive, but remember how much more costly is the European tax system.
What about the things Medicare does not cover? What about the costs of private insurance in Europe?
>While university tuition is much lower than here, only public colleges in Germany are free
apparently, the writer has no idea of the education culutre in Europe and projects the american model to Europe. In most european constitutions, education is a service which must be provided publicly, in all levels. Private universities, apart from England, are considered an alien body.
>>63638442
>He also lists many countries celebrating May Day, extolling workers, pointedly mentioning the USA does not. Evidently Moore has never heard of Labor Day.
..why not celebrate it in the 1st of May like the rest of the world? Is it because the memory of the date will create a connection to worker's history? And yes, I am convinced the assumption that MM hasn't heard of Labour Day is correct, he only grew up in a town that thrived of undustrialism with his dad a factory worker, in a state with great Union history.
>He shows us prisons in Finland, and it's true prisoners appear to be better treated than in our country, but he never mentions "Club Fed" minimum security prisons here, also without gates, such as Butner Federal Correctional Facility in North Carolina or Mahoney State in Pennsylvania
the credibility of the article is seriously shattered here; if he means the prisons where the yuppies go, then he has missed the point entirely.
>Finally, he interviewed Vigdís Finnbogadóttir of Iceland, the first democratically elected woman president in the world, then presumed if only women were our leaders there'd be a different set of thinking and little or no war. Never mentioned was Margaret Thatcher or Golda Meir, or that Indira Gandhi in 1975 suspended democracy in India for 19 months. He implied female business leaders are better, having apparently not heard of Carly Fiorina's disaster at Hewlett-Packard.
Maybe they are better compared to the number of women in power positions. He also forgot to mention Madeline Albright. Generally, this is a good point however, it's not the person, it's the institution.
Moore is pretty bad when it comes to cherry picking numbers from multiple studies or reports.
You can take 10 surveys and he will pick the best possible result for the cause he supports from one survey, and take the worst possible result for the thing he dislikes from an unrelated publication. The numbers vary quite a bit from publication to publication as criteria and survey methods change slightly from one organization to another.
Critics argue that any comparison should be apples to apples using the same publication or survey. Moore refuses to do this.
For example in Sicko:
>A BCC report said Americans spend $5711 year and cubans spend $251 per year
>Moore found a separate report claiming America spends over $7000 per year and that Cuba also spends more
>Moore chose the low number for Cuba ($256) from the BBC report and the high number for America (Over $7000) from the other report.
This makes for the most dramatic possible difference and really pads his numbers. It is blatant cherry picking and it is not necessary.
