Yet another liberal columnist has chimed in on the criticism of Michael Moore’s “documentary” - F911:
Scott Simon, of NPR, pens When Punchline Trumps Honesty : There’s more McCarthy than Murrow in the work of Michael Moore.
A documentary film doesn’t have to be fair and balanced, to coin a phrase. But it ought to make an attempt to be accurate. It can certainly be pointed and opinionated. But it should not knowingly misrepresent the truth. Much of Michael Moore’s films and books, however entertaining to his fans and enraging to his critics, seems to regard facts as mere nuisances to the story he wants to tell.
Back in 1991 that sharpest of film critics, the New Yorker’s Pauline Kael, blunted some of the raves for Mr. Moore’s “Roger and Me” by pointing out how the film misrepresented many facts about plant closings in Flint, Mich., and caricatured people it purported to feel for. “The film I saw was shallow and facetious,” said Kael, “a piece of gonzo demagoguery that made me feel cheap for laughing.”His methods remain unrefined in “Fahrenheit 9/11.” Mr. Moore ignores or misrepresents the truth, prefers innuendo to fact, edits with poetic license rather than accuracy, and strips existing news footage of its context to make events and real people say what he wants, even if they don’t. As Kael observed back then, Mr. Moore’s method is no more high-minded than “the work of a slick ad exec.”
I’m not saying that Moore doesn’t have the right to make the movie - - I just question the legitimacy of him calling it a documentary. A documentary is usually a film based on hard, proven facts - - not slick, slimy innuendo. This makes the second liberal columnist to speak out against, and in criticism of, Moore’s latest flick.
It’s good to see that some of the folks on the left aren’t swallowing the blue Kool Aid.
I...
12:46 am on July 28th, 2004
I don’t mean to get off topic.. or complain.. but where is mah RE: Blog? *sniffle*
12:48 am on July 28th, 2004
I was waaaaaayyy too busy this past week to even think about it. Look for it this coming Sunday, rachel
12:55 am on July 28th, 2004
Okay good… ya know if you want ideas just holler. I can prolly think of some being a very unbusy and drugged up housewife right now
11:58 pm on July 28th, 2004
As I posted after seeing the production I liked it - but it is most definately not a documentary.
12:01 am on July 29th, 2004
SL - I’m glad you’re not drinking the Kool Aid, either, my friend
10:41 pm on August 1st, 2004
the movie ws great and WAS a documentary because it showed footage of what was actually happening (real footage instead of sound stage footage..) Repubulicans just hate all of the facts coming out about Bush not leaving the room, why didn’t the SS (Secret Service) whisk the president-elect away to be safe? The message behind the Movie is that GWB and his administration along with other entities were involved in 9/11. The American Government sold out the people of NY to have a world changing event for political actions to be blamed on for years to come!!
Use your brains for more then just soaking up the BS on CNN and the FOX news channel!!
tracyv
10:44 pm on August 1st, 2004
GWB was following a script by stayin in that room so all of the “controlled planes could follow their orders and take out the targets (the twin towers!)!! Because I don’t think any adult could claim to be as stupid as GWB acts!!
tracyv
1:21 am on August 2nd, 2004
*ding ding* We have a Kool Aid drinker here!