Sun Jun 06, 2004 9:52 pm
Originally posted by SavageParrot
Re: Michael Moore
He's welcome here. I've read all his books and I really rather liked them, and 'bowling for columbine' was genius. Can I assume you are not a fan then...
You're kidding right?
How about this: As an American, I'm thankful Great Britain was able to play a minor role in the defeat of Germany.
What do you think of that? That's about as factual as anything Michael Moore produced.
It's a bit funny, excuse me, but you go to extremes condemning movies that do have a hint of sensationalism of course, but you think Michael Moore's films and books are factual??
Oh boy....
Sun Jun 06, 2004 10:06 pm
i can see it now
saving private wayne: liberation of cein
saving private wayne: liberation of cein
Sun Jun 06, 2004 11:34 pm
I agree it would be interesting to see such movies, but they won't come from Hollywood, whose business is entertainment, not art or education.
I remember being angry with U571, until I remembered that what was done is still better than no movie at all. What got me angrier was they again depicted Germans as bad guys, who shoot helpless sailors in the water. That occured only once in the war, and had it be known at the time the sub commander would likely have been demoted or shot. (He was shot, after the war).
BTW, SavageParrot, sorry for nit-picking, but church burning did occur. It happened in several places in Quebec in 1838. The British army did exactly like in the movie.
I remember being angry with U571, until I remembered that what was done is still better than no movie at all. What got me angrier was they again depicted Germans as bad guys, who shoot helpless sailors in the water. That occured only once in the war, and had it be known at the time the sub commander would likely have been demoted or shot. (He was shot, after the war).
BTW, SavageParrot, sorry for nit-picking, but church burning did occur. It happened in several places in Quebec in 1838. The British army did exactly like in the movie.
Mon Jun 07, 2004 12:37 am
It's not up to hollywood to make movies which please people from other nations. Several American movies have depicted Americans doing things they really didn't do, but so what? They're the ones making them. They can do whatever the heck they want.
The only types of films Canada produces are sappy low budget love films, or documentaries. It would be great to have a big budget, popular Canadian movie be released world wide, but I'm not crossing my fingers.
The UK has harry potter, so obviously they are capable of making high budget films. Why doesn't a british film company produce a battle of britain film? it would be HUGE in the UK, as well as world wide.
The only types of films Canada produces are sappy low budget love films, or documentaries. It would be great to have a big budget, popular Canadian movie be released world wide, but I'm not crossing my fingers.
The UK has harry potter, so obviously they are capable of making high budget films. Why doesn't a british film company produce a battle of britain film? it would be HUGE in the UK, as well as world wide.
Mon Jun 07, 2004 12:42 am
Last time I checked Hollywood wasn't in the business of making historically accurate documentaries. Its called the entertainment industry for a reason.
Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:13 am
Sorry to bust your bubble there Savageparrot but the UK had the enigma system long before then.
The Polish gave it to them. So if you wanted factual accuracy you are going to have to include some scenes were the polish smuggle one out of Poland.
And please please please take Michael Moore. That guy is worse than Oliver Stone.
And the British didn't form the largest empire the world has yet seen by being nice to people and offering crumpets and tea.
The Polish gave it to them. So if you wanted factual accuracy you are going to have to include some scenes were the polish smuggle one out of Poland.
And please please please take Michael Moore. That guy is worse than Oliver Stone.
And the British didn't form the largest empire the world has yet seen by being nice to people and offering crumpets and tea.
Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:24 am
Lol, the number does sound good, but when it says "Based on facts" or whatever, I dont think that means everything in the movie is fact. But I would be interested in a WW2 movie with a complete British point of veiw. That would be very interesting. Many people don't even credit Britain for their strong efforts in WW2. Same for Canada.. I would be most interested in a Battle of Britain movie though...after I watch movies such as "Saving Private Ryan" and such it makes me feel differently when I play some maps in BF1942.Originally posted by Evan
Do you believe everything in a movie is correct? U571 could have been just a random number. I like the ring to it actually..
-Slayer
Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:26 am
Originally posted by Colonel Ingus
And the British didn't form the largest empire the world has yet seen by being nice to people and offering crumpets and tea.
Mon Jun 07, 2004 2:12 am
First, just to jump back to the original topic for a second (all you thread hijackers, you know who you are ), Canada's film industry is not currently geared for such an endeavour.
While it is certainly true that we produce all manner of talented writers and directors and actors and set designers and whatnot in this country, they all flock to Hollywood as soon as humanly possible, leaving the Great White North behind them. No one should blame them - that's where the money is. But unfortunately those who are left just aren't marketable enough to make big budget films. Or they find Hollywood-style films too ostentatious and purposely avoid them.
I personally like Canada's film industry - I find it very 'quaint.' But something of the scale you describe just isn't an option for us.
When it comes right down to it, I'd rather have my history dished up to me in a well-researched documentary anyway. Less chance of being upset by anyone's 'artistic license.' I do love a good war movie, but only for pure entertainment purposes. Sadly, they don't make 'em like they used to (fondly hugs his copies of Kelly's Heroes and Where Eagles Dare).
And now just to stir the pot a little more - if Michael Moore is such a liar, why hasn't anyone sued him for libel or slander? People sue each other every day it seems over matters far less grave than the accusations he makes...you'd think someone would have caught him in a lie by now and taken him to the cleaners.
), Canada's film industry is not currently geared for such an endeavour.
While it is certainly true that we produce all manner of talented writers and directors and actors and set designers and whatnot in this country, they all flock to Hollywood as soon as humanly possible, leaving the Great White North behind them. No one should blame them - that's where the money is. But unfortunately those who are left just aren't marketable enough to make big budget films. Or they find Hollywood-style films too ostentatious and purposely avoid them.
I personally like Canada's film industry - I find it very 'quaint.' But something of the scale you describe just isn't an option for us.
When it comes right down to it, I'd rather have my history dished up to me in a well-researched documentary anyway. Less chance of being upset by anyone's 'artistic license.' I do love a good war movie, but only for pure entertainment purposes. Sadly, they don't make 'em like they used to (fondly hugs his copies of Kelly's Heroes and Where Eagles Dare).
And now just to stir the pot a little more - if Michael Moore is such a liar, why hasn't anyone sued him for libel or slander? People sue each other every day it seems over matters far less grave than the accusations he makes...you'd think someone would have caught him in a lie by now and taken him to the cleaners.
Mon Jun 07, 2004 5:32 am
Originally posted by Colonel Ingus
And the British didn't form the largest empire the world has yet seen by being nice to people and offering crumpets and tea.
I am gonna second that vote of
You are quite right about the Poles though, it's a good call
Mon Jun 07, 2004 5:52 am
Originally posted by Chacal
BTW, SavageParrot, sorry for nit-picking, but church burning did occur. It happened in several places in Quebec in 1838. The British army did exactly like in the movie.
Yep and when they make a film about the 1837-8 uprising it will be a appropriate to show that. It would make a good film as it has a kind of tragic nobility to it which I like in films.
As for Michael Moore, I do not believe that what he says is the whole truth, he is clearly selective in what he portays and is working to a liberal, leftist agenda. Nevertheless saying that everything he says is a lie is untrue. IMO America needs to learn how to take criticism, that oscars ceremony where they booed him because he spoke out against the war was a disgrace, and furthermore was reminiscent to me of National Socialist rallies. I can't believe that the organisers asked him not to mention the war in the first place anyway. I would personally like to see more americans publishing books to take on his arguments head to head instead of producing facile arguments like he is unpatriotic or a liar.
Mon Jun 07, 2004 10:01 am
Originally posted by SavageParrot
Yep and when they make a film about the 1837-8 uprising it will be a appropriate to show that. It would make a good film as it has a kind of tragic nobility to it which I like in films.
As for Michael Moore, I do not believe that what he says is the whole truth, he is clearly selective in what he portays and is working to a liberal, leftist agenda. Nevertheless saying that everything he says is a lie is untrue. IMO America needs to learn how to take criticism, that oscars ceremony where they booed him because he spoke out against the war was a disgrace, and furthermore was reminiscent to me of National Socialist rallies. I can't believe that the organisers asked him not to mention the war in the first place anyway. I would personally like to see more americans publishing books to take on his arguments head to head instead of producing facile arguments like he is unpatriotic or a liar.
He's beyond even a Leftist agenda. The Oscars is supposed to be a non-political format. It is not a soap box for Michael Moore or anyone else, although Hollywood itself is Far Left. He doesn't own the Oscars. If anything, Michael Moore would fit right in at a National Socialist rally. There is plenty of information available debunking his half-truths and lies. There is also a film being made.
Michael Moore is very clever in his methods to distort the truth. He's a liar, a fraud and anyone that takes his "work" as truth are simply gullible, looking for anything anti-establishment, or refuse to live in reality, which is usually the younger generation. He has no credibility with any serious journalist from either side of the political spectrum. If you are intellectually honest and seek the truth about Michael Moore, you will be forced to admit he is a scumbag.....a very wealthy scumbag. How does it feel bankrolling someone that claims the 'rich' are evil, yet is filthy rich himself?
Seeing how Michael Moore is from my neck of the woods, I know a few things about him. His first film 'Roger and Me' was done in Flint, Michigan. This city was hit hard by GM's (General Motors) cutbacks and plant closings. Moore was hailed as a hero of the 'workin man' (UAW lingo), good ole Made in USA and all that crap. Problem was, he drove a Honda Civic. When confronted with this, his response was "that's all I can afford to drive", as if to imply a Honda Civic was some cheap foreign junk, and cars like the Chevette were reserved for the privledged rich. I was there and heard him say it. It was laughable. His dad made good money at GM, enough to send his kids to college, which Moore dropped out of. He then started a local blog called the 'Flint Voice', exposing all the "corruption and racism" in the local governments and business. He learned early how and who to lie about people without spawning lawsuits.
As for the lawsuits, he is very clever in the way he says things. If someone could be sued for every untrue utterance, the courts would be backlogged for decades. However, James Nichols, who lives near me, is suing Michael Moore for $10 million. You need to get more up-to-date informaion from your pro-Michael Moore websites.
Fred Barnes, respected by both the Left and the Right:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/127ujhuf.asp
How can he sue for that?
I won't even bother providing links. Do it yourself, there's plenty of facts to go around.
Mon Jun 07, 2004 11:04 am
We need less of moore. 
(I agree with rc, scum he is.)
As far as "saving private wayne" goes - lol , I'm a history buff, I would love to see more movies portray non-american sides of the story such as the previously mentioned "battle of britain".
(I agree with rc, scum he is.)
As far as "saving private wayne" goes - lol , I'm a history buff, I would love to see more movies portray non-american sides of the story such as the previously mentioned "battle of britain".
Mon Jun 07, 2004 11:10 am
Sigh....
Moore is just the Dem's version of Limbaugh. Just because he shows only his view does not mean he is this 'scumbag' you say he is, as then any person who speaks out for what they beleive is a scumbag, since they will only mention what supports their arguements(this includes politicians, also).
I find Moore's work to be very interesting, and I have watched him since his first movie and his early TV shows. He is very liberal, but he is also a master of grabbing people's attention(which is why i find him to be very interesting). I do find that for every liberal piece he had on his TV shows, there was a nonbiased piece.
Bowling was a great movie, and most people wrote it off as anti-NRA/guns(without seeing it), which it in no way is. i found his conclusions on why Americans are so trigger happy to be interesting, and I would love to see indepentant studies to confirm or reject his theories.
Moore is just the Dem's version of Limbaugh. Just because he shows only his view does not mean he is this 'scumbag' you say he is, as then any person who speaks out for what they beleive is a scumbag, since they will only mention what supports their arguements(this includes politicians, also).
I find Moore's work to be very interesting, and I have watched him since his first movie and his early TV shows. He is very liberal, but he is also a master of grabbing people's attention(which is why i find him to be very interesting). I do find that for every liberal piece he had on his TV shows, there was a nonbiased piece.
Bowling was a great movie, and most people wrote it off as anti-NRA/guns(without seeing it), which it in no way is. i found his conclusions on why Americans are so trigger happy to be interesting, and I would love to see indepentant studies to confirm or reject his theories.
Mon Jun 07, 2004 11:21 am
I am gonna second that vote of
Confusion here. Are you saying they did form an empire that ruled well over 1/4 of the ENTIRE world for over 100 years by offering tea and crumpets?
Or are you just taking exception to the tea and crumpets crack:D