freeflybella 0 #126 July 27, 2004 QuoteIf an audience is full of non-experts on a subject, they are counting on someone who has done research and who IS an expert to INFORM them. Hee hee. Y'all are crazy! Who here is an expert on what happened Sept, 11? Every damn one of you/us is relying on what we heard! My favorite put-down for MM is that the [patriotic] american people[/patriotic] are too stupid or naive to do their own research or study beyond what's spoon fed to them! FFS, don't hate tha playa... Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #127 July 27, 2004 QuoteIt is not the responsibility of the filmmaker to present all sides of an issue. He is working his butt to present his side. He sure is working his butt -- he's even painted it up to look like a pair of human facial lips! --Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #128 July 27, 2004 QuoteQuoteIt is the responsibility of a documentary filmmaker to be truthful and not intentionally deceitful. Do you agree? No, a documentary is a film based on, related to, or consisting of documentary evidence. F911 meets that criteria. It is the viewers responsibility to not blindly believe what they see at the movie theater. And for the record, has Moore ever called this movie a documentary or advertised it as such? I'm not sure, but I don't recally that being the case. He was given an award for it that called it a documentary and everyone's been calling it that ever since. I knew I could count on a hedged response to this, including the idea that an audience that turns to an "authority" for information needs to already be so knowledgeable about the subject that they'll be able to tell lies from truth. Can you say "circular," boys and girls? Um, we may not be talking about the same movie, but when Michael Moore accepted an Oscar for "Bowling for Columbine" as "BEST DOCUMENTARY," he tacitly agreed that it WAS a documentary. So it doesn't matter if he ever uttered the word or not. I don't have to ever say the word "check" in order to get one cashed at the bank, do I? --Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #129 July 27, 2004 QuoteQuoteIf an audience is full of non-experts on a subject, they are counting on someone who has done research and who IS an expert to INFORM them. Hee hee. Y'all are crazy! Who here is an expert on what happened Sept, 11? Every damn one of you/us is relying on what we heard! My favorite put-down for MM is that the [patriotic] american people[/patriotic] are too stupid or naive to do their own research or study beyond what's spoon fed to them! FFS, don't hate tha playa... Um, I personally don't have the time or inclination to do the background research on everything I wish to know about. That's why I read the papers about a train wreck/chemical spill rather than go on down there and take a look-see for myself. Moore prides himself on having done loads of research, and employed loads of "fact-checkers" for F-9/11, so yes, it IS fair to say he is palming himself off as an "expert" whereas we ordinary citizens have not pored over Congressional documents, business documents, transcripts, ad nauseum. --Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #130 July 27, 2004 "If MM had a personal problem with skydiving, who here would want him to do a "Documentary" on it?" Nice one, definitely an interesting scenario to consider. I might also be tempted to counter an equal scenario (call it 'liberal spin'). If MM didn't have a problem with skydiving, and set out to make a documentary shattering the popular myths that our sport attracts, lets say it slammed the media's approach to incidents, who here would have a problem?-------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #131 July 27, 2004 QuoteQuoteIt is not the responsibility of the filmmaker to present all sides of an issue. It is the responsibility of a documentary filmmaker to be truthful and not intentionally deceitful. Do you agree? No. As I said - it's not his job. He can choose to, and I think I think it's more effective when you present a piece that cannot be so easily attacked, but that is his perogative. The only movie of his I saw was Roger and Me. Mostly video footage, just as I believe the more recent ones are. By definition that is truthful material. The hangup is in the editing, something that hacks from across the spectrum are seen abusing. Again, it's not a requirement - if you went into a movie like 911 expecting a fair debate, you were kidding yourself. Political documentaries aren't fair. Typically the difference between them and propoganda is a matter of semantics. Why else would one make one if not to promote a personal agenda? BTW, HBO ran in 2002 a documentary done by a woman that traveled with the Bush campaign in 2000. Showed him to be more articulate in private than he presented himself to the voters, but also showed his temper and rougher edges. Can't seem to recall the name anymore. Something with George, I think. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #132 July 27, 2004 QuoteUm, I personally don't have the time or inclination to do the background research on everything I wish to know about. That's why I read the papers about a train wreck/chemical spill rather than go on down there and take a look-see for myself. Do you read the National Enquirer to get news about it? When they say that the creature from the black lagoon rose up from the toxic waste and ate 3 babies do you believe it? Why not? Do you consider the source? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fast 0 #133 July 27, 2004 Quote"If MM had a personal problem with skydiving, who here would want him to do a "Documentary" on it?" Nice one, definitely an interesting scenario to consider. I might also be tempted to counter an equal scenario (call it 'liberal spin'). If MM didn't have a problem with skydiving, and set out to make a documentary shattering the popular myths that our sport attracts, lets say it slammed the media's approach to incidents, who here would have a problem? I would have a problem with it. The truth does come out in the end and his methods would be exposed and this would lead to more people thinking that skydivers are bad, crazy, whatever it is people think of us. If he did it in a way that was not misrepresentful of the truth then I wouldn't have a problem with it but I think thats the point of this thread. Its not based soley on truth its also based on his interpretive spin of the actual reality and is then passed off as fact.~D Where troubles melt like lemon drops Away above the chimney tops That's where you'll find me. Swooping is taking one last poke at the bear before escaping it's cave - davelepka Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #134 July 27, 2004 QuoteIf MM didn't have a problem with skydiving, and set out to make a documentary shattering the popular myths that our sport attracts, lets say it slammed the media's approach to incidents, who here would have a problem? If MM told the truth? I would have a problem with it. I would have to quit skydiving because of the increased freefall danger. The probability of hitting one of the numerous flying pigs would be huge. Those darned flying pigs would be everywhere. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 221 #135 July 27, 2004 lest we forget all those cartoon anvils in the clouds - I never fly into clouds.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #136 July 27, 2004 Quotelest we forget all those cartoon anvils in the clouds - I never fly into clouds. I don't fly into clouds because I'd suffocate. My skin couldn't absorb the oxygen like it normally does in freefall. My scenario was an appropriate analogy and more of a question as to whether people feel that MM is dishonest or not. Not whether the reader considers themselves enlightened or superior to others (one type of response) or can turn the analogy around to something that doesn't fit (another response). That's all. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #137 July 27, 2004 Your question was answered by another poster who theorized that MM could be a myth-buster and provide truth about skydiving to the great unwashed masses. My response would be that this would occur when pigs fly. Hence, the freefall traffic problem. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #138 July 27, 2004 Many of us think he will be dishonest. People more in line with liberal-democrat/US-Bush bashers are more into "he tweaks the truth in a good way" yet they are against it, without conceding he is a person who sells fiction defined as truth."According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,453 #139 July 27, 2004 Quoteperson who sells fiction defined as truth He unashamedly sells what he sees as the truth. He doesn't try to say he's unbiased -- he's not. For that matter, the documentary "The Thin Blue Line" (which got Randall Adams out of jail for a bad murder conviction) uses re-enactments (normally taboo), and I'll bet the police hated it. But it's considered to be a documentary. If you don't like it, fine. If you think he's only showing part of the truth, fine. He is only showing part. Would you give credibility whatsoever to any documentary that showed anything remotely considered liberal in a positive light? Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #140 July 27, 2004 I would. The problem is someone trying to sell a political ideology based on false premises, and then have followers who air his fictions as the truth."According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflybella 0 #141 July 27, 2004 Quote Your question was answered by another poster who theorized that MM could be a myth-buster and provide truth about skydiving to the great unwashed masses. My response would be that this would occur when pigs fly. Hmm, if you're talking about MY post - I never said anything about busting 'myths'. Nor providing truth, especially to masses. I merely said, if there were any truth to any negativity - if enough people cared to follow up - maybe some good could come of it. You have to allow for both sides of any equation. There will always be 2 sides. If you weren't referring to my post - never mind. Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jib 0 #142 July 28, 2004 QuoteQuoteperson who sells fiction defined as truth He unashamedly sells what he sees as the truth. He doesn't try to say he's unbiased -- he's not. Yes, that's why lawyers review it to make sure he doesn't get sued. Afterall, it's the truth, right? -------------------------------------------------- the depth of his depravity sickens me. -- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #143 July 28, 2004 QuoteIf you weren't referring to my post - never mind Nope. Nacmac's. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #144 July 28, 2004 QuoteYes, that's why lawyers review it to make sure he doesn't get sued. Afterall, it's the truth, right? His version of the truth. There are people out there who truly believe their race is better than any other race. To them it is the truth, could still get hem sued though. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Muenkel 0 #145 July 28, 2004 QuoteNope. Nacmac's. Do you ever want to say "NacMac, Patty Wack, give a dog a bone" when you see his name? I'm still pre-coffee...you'll have to forgive me. _________________________________________ Chris Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jib 0 #146 July 28, 2004 QuoteQuoteYes, that's why lawyers review it to make sure he doesn't get sued. Afterall, it's the truth, right? His version of the truth. There are people out there who truly believe their race is better than any other race. To them it is the truth, could still get hem sued though. To truely believe something is guaranteed by the Constitution. To say something about someone else that is untrue out of malice is something else entirely. -------------------------------------------------- the depth of his depravity sickens me. -- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 221 #147 July 28, 2004 QuoteQuoteperson who sells fiction defined as truth He unashamedly sells what he sees as the truth. He doesn't try to say he's unbiased -- he's not. For that matter, the documentary "The Thin Blue Line" (which got Randall Adams out of jail for a bad murder conviction) uses re-enactments (normally taboo), and I'll bet the police hated it. But it's considered to be a documentary. If you don't like it, fine. If you think he's only showing part of the truth, fine. He is only showing part. Would you give credibility whatsoever to any documentary that showed anything remotely considered liberal in a positive light? Wendy W. The 9-11 commission has declared that Wilson, the basis for alot of MM's information, lied, and attempted to decieve, if not only for political gain. Where is the retraction form MM? Where is his apology for putting forth the facts as he knew them to be then? How is it that he can sit there and tell Bill O'Rilley that Bush Lied - and it doesn't matter that those were the facts as he knew them to be - but denies that he lied in his movie. How can you back someone that is THAT hypocritical and in the same breath bash the current President for the same reasons?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #148 July 28, 2004 QuoteHow is it that he can sit there and tell Bill O'Rilley that Bush Lied - and it doesn't matter that those were the facts as he knew them to be - but denies that he lied in his movie. How can you back someone that is THAT hypocritical and in the same breath bash the current President for the same reasons? How can you attack a man so vigorously, yet defend Bush for doing the same thing? Isn't that hypocritical as well? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 221 #149 July 28, 2004 QuoteQuoteHow is it that he can sit there and tell Bill O'Rilley that Bush Lied - and it doesn't matter that those were the facts as he knew them to be - but denies that he lied in his movie. How can you back someone that is THAT hypocritical and in the same breath bash the current President for the same reasons? How can you attack a man so vigorously, yet defend Bush for doing the same thing? Isn't that hypocritical as well? It's easy - just act like a liberal.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #150 July 28, 2004 QuoteIt's easy - just act like a liberal. ahh yes, I keep forgetting. When a liberal does something it is bad, when a conservative does the same thing, it is good. Ohh and I forget, the most ardent Bush supporters then continue on and claim to be libertarian. So, turtle, are you saying then that every once in a while you behave like a liberal pinko commie? Those times when it benefits you? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
