A four star movie!!

[Bill Glasheen]

Do I call it right or what? Yak all you want about Farenheit Moore. THIS is the movie to see!

With special effects so convincing you don't even think about them, a head-case hero and a three-dimensional villain who is his equal, socko Spider-Man 2 (* * * * out of four) has something for everyone.

Like 2002's original, this is an uncommonly entertaining movie for one whose principals' near-morbid hang-ups are as messy as Spidey's projectile goo. And when a web-spinning spinoff ends up being even better than its predecessor, its potential box office has — to steal a claim from the film's villain — the power of the sun in the palm of its hand.

Review here...

'Spider-Man 2' is a hands-down hit

How great it is to see that even in a summer blockbuster, someone has remembered the importance of being good.

Do you think Michael Moore is listening? Anyone want to bet on whether Michael's movie will stay on top for another weekend?

- Bill

[RACastanet]

Way to go Spidey! And to think, I had the original comic book. It went out with the trash many years ago.

Rich

[IJ]

Bill, whyza so mad that Moore did well at the box office?

[RACastanet]

Moore did well at the box office with $21 Million? I think he ranks about # 120 for opening weekends. The Passion of Christ? That did well, about $84 million, and it was quite controversial and an independent project.

Moore's movie will fade quickly once the choir has heard him preach.

Moore is making $$ by preaching how stupid Americans are. Well, he must be right as the 'useful fools' did buy tickets.

Rich

[Gene DeMambro]

Siskel and Roeper called it on Spidey 2 two weeks ago. Where's everybody been ?

Revised figures for Moore show a gross of $23,920,637 from 848 theatres. It's per theatre take is so far third this year, behind Passion an Shrek 2. The film was made for $6 million, so do the math....

But, apparently, only Republicans are allowed to make money....

And Moore's film is praised as being "good", so the point is...

Gene

[Bill Glasheen]

I've seen reviews all over the map on Farenheit, Gene. Most call the movie at least good. None call it great. Many news stories have had lengthy discussions about the inaccuracies. In an interview, Katie Couric even gave him crap about not investing in his wardrobe - an indirect but on-target jab at his penchant for misrepresenting himself as a "poor man."

I don't care about the political affiliations of people when they make money, Gene. I'm happy when all good people are able to take their talents and make a living. What is upsetting to many about Moore's work though isn't just that it is propaganda - which it clearly is. It's the misinformation and outright false allegations that are upsetting - all under the false label of "documentary." Those of us who publish for a living find that kind of behavior offensive. Furthermore, Moore has this penchant for making a$$es of Americans, white people, etc. for the entertainment of the Europeans who think Americans are stupid, and for the comfort of the enemy in Iraq. (And I don't buy the bull**** line about him being a champion of the poor, underclass soldier. He'd rather use them like toilet paper for his own self interest. Ask your average solider in Iraq what he thinks of Moore vs. the job they have to do to stay alive.) He thinks it's funny. I'm happy for the people who hate Bush. There was a time when I hated Nixon, and I've seen better statesmen and presidents. But under the circumstances, I am not amused.

I believe I got online and expressed my approval for Rush Limbaugh being kicked off of Monday night football for making stupid racial comments. In fact several will testify that I've repeatedly made negative comments about Limbaugh's mindless propaganda. I feel no less strong about Moore. So, what does that make me, Gene? Just wondering.

I'd rather go watch fiction like Spiderman that happens to be entertaining. The box office recepits, in the eyes of Moore, were meant to be some kind of validation (or lack thereof) for his message. I happen to be exercising my own right of free speech, and my own "vote" with my nickel.

Since you asked, Gene.

So your point is...

- Bill

[Mark Weitz]

The frist movie was very good so I'm glad to hear this one is worth seeing.

Bill said,

I don't care about the political affiliations of people when they make money, Gene. I'm happy when all good people are able to take their talents and make a living. What is upsetting to many about Moore's work though isn't just that it is propaganda - which it clearly is. It's the misinformation and outright false allegations that are upsetting - all under the false label of "documentary." Those of us who publish for a living find that kind of behavior offensive. Furthermore, Moore has this penchant for making a$$es of Americans, white people, etc. for the entertainment of the Europeans who think Americans are stupid, and for the comfort of the enemy in Iraq. (And I don't buy the bull**** line about him being a champion of the poor, underclass soldier. He'd rather use them like toilet paper for his own self interest. Ask your average solider in Iraq what he thinks of Moore vs. the job they have to do to stay alive.) He thinks it's funny. I'm happy for the people who hate Bush. There was a time when I hated Nixon, and I've seen better statesmen and presidents. But under the circumstances, I am not amused.

Bill, I agree that false allegations and manipulation/distortion of facts is repugnant. It's ironic for Moore because one of the main points of his film, right or wrong, is that politicians are lying, distorting, etc. If he's lying and misrepresenting in the manner you desribe then he stands convicted of that which he accuses those in high office of doing.

I haven't read all of his books but I thought he was mostly making fun of the "stupid white men" in office, not average Americans, which he tries to portray himself as.

At any rate you've piqued my curiousity about some of his claims and interviewing techniques and editing. I'll do some homework and see what I can uncover. I've done a little research and take seriously the rigour and honesty that are essential to get a true picture of things.

Mark

[Gene DeMambro]

Sigh...

There we go again. Express opinions against the Iraq situation and against the Bush administration and you're accused of doing it "for the comfort of the enemy in Iraq". Express opinions for the Iraq situation and for the Bush administration and you're labeled "A Great American"!

Exercise your own right of free speech and "vote" with your nickel. Don't bother others for doing the same.

Gene

[RACastanet]

Mark said: 'I haven't read all of his books but I thought he was mostly making fun of the "stupid white men" in office, not average Americans, which he tries to portray himself as.'

A quote from MM's interview in the British paper The Mirror re Americans:

"They are possibly the dumbest people on the planet..."

Sounds like he hits all Americans with that statement.

As for making money, anyone that can make a fortune in the US is welcome to do so, left or middle or right wing. Capitalism is great in that it works even for those that denounce it!

Rich

[pshaw]

Gene, some people prefer not to face that uncomformable feeling that scruitiny of their beliefs gives them. And many have an axe to grind with Moore over Bowling For Columbine.

Fahrenheit 9/11" is a good film - a bit unfocused in the middle, but it makes compelling arguments, and - more importantly if we are judging it as a film - it makes them well. He may not be a sharp dresser when he goes out in public, and he's an infuriating ass a lot of the time, but Michael Moore certainly knows how to engage and entertain.

You must understand up front that Moore is not even pretending to show all sides here: This documentary (and yes, documentaries can be overtly biased; they are not news programs) is based on Moore's personal opinions, and from the facts available to him.

Go ahead, put the blinders and ear muffs on and get lost in fantasy and comic books. Moore is not going to miss your $8.

[Mark Weitz]

A quote from MM's interview in the British paper The Mirror re Americans: "They are possibly the dumbest people on the planet..."
Sounds like he hits all Americans with that statement

He's an idiot for saying that, nothing more to be said about that. If he really didn't believe that but said it to be cute, he's still be a fool and self-serving.

Still, I like a lot of his material but I won't rationalize his idiotic comments.

Express opinions against the Iraq situation and against the Bush administration and you're accused of doing it "for the comfort of the enemy in Iraq". Express opinions for the Iraq situation and for the Bush administration and you're labeled "A Great American"!

Good point. There are obvious differences between Bush supporters and detractors, those for the war and those opposed. But I think people have to be careful not to assume that their position makes them a patriot and a dissenting view, even in a time of war, makes them unpatriotic.

On a lighter note, I'm all for pure entertainment and I've was saddened by the lack of quality in Arnold Schwarzeneggar's T-3. What ever you might think of him as governor, he really needs to get back to his roots, go back to being an action hero, and start producing stuff on par with Predator, Total Recall, and T-2. As for Spidey, I'll be checking it out this weekend hopefully.

Mark

[Bill Glasheen]

Gene

You, sir, are a pain in the butt. But you are also a friend, so you are welcome to play that role.

You wrote...

There we go again. Express opinions against the Iraq situation and against the Bush administration and you're accused of doing it "for the comfort of the enemy in Iraq". Express opinions for the Iraq situation and for the Bush administration and you're labeled "A Great American"!

I'm disappointed, Gene. Generally you pop up when you perceive that there is unfairness. Now you, sir, are being unfair.

I have not once posted under the "Great American" title. That is Rich's domain. Rich and I go way back. He and I have varying points of view. If you don't believe me, check out some of our epic online battles. When Rich is right, I tell him so. When someone calls him on something (like some of Mike's valid assertions), I will agree. But he's still the godfather of my number 1 son. That's just the way we are.

You might be interested in knowing that I voted in the last election, and I did not vote for Bush. I never voted for his dad either.

I was anti Nixon as well. But I did not appreciate it when Jane Fonda visited the Viet Cong. Prisoners who came back reported that they had her antics thrown in their face as part of their psychological abuse.

Making this broad generalization, Gene, is beneath you. Please be more careful.

Exercise your own right of free speech and "vote" with your nickel. Don't bother others for doing the same.

How am I "bothering" others, Gene? Come on!! Do you actually read my posts? Have you read my critiques on the tough issues forum?

In the words of pshaw,

some people prefer not to face that uncomformable feeling that scruitiny of their beliefs gives them.

That's not my problem. This is an open forum, where all are allowed to express their points of view. That means we get to disagree, and express personal points of view that happen to be contrary to others.

You and others are casting folks into this black/white, democrat vs. republican, rich vs. poor, pro war vs. pro peace mold. Give me a break!

pshaw

You wrote

Go ahead, put the blinders and ear muffs on and get lost in fantasy and comic books.

Apparently you also have problems with selective memory and/or post reading.

As I AND OTHERS have stated before (and I'll be happy to quote myself if you wish to challenge) we choose not to see Moore's movie by paying for it, as he and others are using box office receipts as vindication for his message and his propaganda tactics. As I and others stated before, we'll be happy to see the movie when it is showing for free. If Michael wants to invite me for a showing as he did president Bush, I'll be happy to come and I'll bring the popcorn. And I'll speak with him as well.

And if you check my posts on the tough issues forum, you'll see my background research on the subject is more than adequate.

So nice try, but it doesn't wash. Disagreement with your point of view does not imply ignorance. How does it feel when folks like Rush Limbaugh would accuse you of the same? When he pulls that crap, I'm just as repulsed.

- Bill

[IJ]

Moore's take at the box office is now irrelevant because it's less than spiderman 2? I don't see at all how this is relevant. A LOT of terrible movies have made tons of money; I have seem some that were quite good and made very little. But if we ARE to use the $ standard, we should compare apples to apples. Spidey2 was made for, according to the "Metro," about 200 million before advertising, and is an action flick, a summer movie, that one would expect to do very well. On the other hand 9/11 is political commentary, which one can expect to make a lot less, especially since it's target is far less than spidey's in the sense that half the country is against the movie because of it's message. I don't agree with the $ standard, but it's obvious that the movie did very well compared with other political commentaries or "documentaries."

The metro also commented that the major factual points of the movie were, according to the NY times, "a matter of public record." Clearly his SLANT on these issues is admitted and well publicized. I've yet to see the NY times review or the film, so will refrain from registering my own opinion at this point.

Can we have the WHOLE quote where MM said ALL Americans were ostensibly stupid? Sounds like something that could easily have been taken out of context. Even if he wasn't referring to a subset of the country, he may have been using hyperbole. I, for example, have said many a time that I wouldn't trust doctors, that I would double check all their moves, and that they're "gomers," (cognitively impaired elderly, is the usual usage) and only by context (that I was referring to myself and my peers, for example, or to illustrate a point after an error) would it be clear that my complete views are quite different.

That said, if he trashed the whole country, he's a schmuck.

[RACastanet]

Hello Ian

'Can we have the WHOLE quote where MM said ALL Americans were ostensibly stupid?'

I'll see if I can find a link to 'The Mirror' for you. There was a lot more where that quote came from.

As for judging the movie vs otheres of its ilk, that is reletivism. While at GE, the goal ws not to be the best in your niche or segment, but to be the best period. MM may be on top of something, but it might only make him the best smelling garbage in the heap. A few on this forum have stated MM's movies are meant to be amusing, so at least compare it to 'amusing' movies, as Shreck 2 and Spidey 2 are meant to be.

Rich

[RACastanet]

Hello Ian. I could not get into 'The Mirror', but I pulled this off the NY Times website (my apologies to them). I did not link it as it requires registration.

The NY Times is one of the great liberal media bastions in America and the world. They really tow the line of the left. However, they employ the 'librals favorite conservative' - David brooks - as a token for balance. If this got past the NYT editors, it must be correct.

Read on:

By DAVID BROOKS

Published: June 26, 2004


ARTICLE TOOLS


E-Mail This Article
Printer-Friendly Format
Most E-Mailed Articles

Columnist Page: David Brooks
Forum: Discuss This Column

E-mail: dabrooks@nytimes.com


TIMES NEWS TRACKER



Topics
Alerts

Moore, Michael


Politics and Government

In years past, American liberals have had to settle for intellectual and moral leadership from the likes of John Dewey, Reinhold Niebuhr and Martin Luther King Jr. But now, a grander beacon has appeared on the mountaintop, and from sea to shining sea, tens of thousands have joined in the adulation.

So it is worth taking a moment to study the metaphysics of Michael Moore. For Moore is not only a filmmaker; he is a man of ideas, and his work is based on an actual worldview.

Like Hemingway, Moore does his boldest thinking while abroad. For example, it was during an interview with the British paper The Mirror that Moore unfurled what is perhaps the central insight of his oeuvre, that Americans are kind of crappy.

"They are possibly the dumbest people on the planet . . . in thrall to conniving, thieving smug [pieces of the human anatomy]," Moore intoned. "We Americans suffer from an enforced ignorance. We don't know about anything that's happening outside our country. Our stupidity is embarrassing."

It transpires that Europeans are quite excited to hear this supple description of the American mind. And Moore has been kind enough to crisscross the continent, speaking to packed lecture halls, explicating the general vapidity and crassness of his countrymen. "That's why we're smiling all the time," he told a rapturous throng in Munich. "You can see us coming down the street. You know, `Hey! Hi! How's it going?' We've got that big [expletive] grin on our face all the time because our brains aren't loaded down."

Naturally, the people from the continent that brought us Descartes, Kant and Goethe are fascinated by these insights. Moore's books have sold faster there than at home. No American intellectual is taken so seriously in Europe, save perhaps the great Chomsky.

Before a delighted Cambridge crowd, Moore reflected on the tragedy of human existence: "You're stuck with being connected to this country of mine, which is known for bringing sadness and misery to places around the globe." In Liverpool, he paused to contemplate the epicenters of evil in the modern world: "It's all part of the same ball of wax, right? The oil companies, Israel, Halliburton."

In the days after Sept. 11, while others were disoriented, Moore was able to see clearly: "We, the United States of America, are culpable in committing so many acts of terror and bloodshed that we had better get a clue about the culture of violence in which we have been active participants."

This leads to Michael Moore's global plan of action. "Don't be like us," he told a crowd in Berlin. "You've got to stand up, right? You've got to be brave."

In an open letter to the German people in Die Zeit, Moore asked, "Should such an ignorant people lead the world?" Then he began to reflect on things economic. His central insight here is that the American economy, like its people, is pretty crappy, too: "Don't go the American way when it comes to economics, jobs and services for the poor and immigrants. It is the wrong way."

In an interview with a Japanese newspaper, Moore helped citizens of that country understand why the United States went to war in Iraq: "The motivation for war is simple. The U.S. government started the war with Iraq in order to make it easy for U.S. corporations to do business in other countries. They intend to use cheap labor in those countries, which will make Americans rich."

But venality doesn't come up when he writes about those who are killing Americans in Iraq: "The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not `insurgents' or `terrorists' or `The Enemy.' They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow — and they will win." Until then, few social observers had made the connection between Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and Paul Revere.

So we have our Sartre. And the liberal grandees Arthur Schlesinger, Ted Sorenson, Tom Harkin and Barbara Boxer flock to his openings. In Washington, a Senate vote was delayed because so many Democrats wanted to see his movie.

The standards of socially acceptable liberal opinion have shifted. We're a long way from John Dewey.

Perhaps inspired by Moore, I got a fact wrong in my previous column. Bill Clinton did not win the evangelical vote in 1992 and 1996. I had relied on a report that was later corrected.
Comments? Note references to Germany as well?

Rich