Michael Moore is an idiot

[Jebus]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/a...ahrenheit_911_2 (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040906/ap_en_mo/oscars_fahrenheit_911_2)

I mean honestly, what a jackass. Sure he made a great documentary. He made very valuable points and created quite a stir in this year's campaign for presidency.

But that's exactly what the Oscars, and the Best Picture Award, shouldn't be about. It, and they, should be about great acting, excellent directing, heartwarming music, and in some cases great special effects and costumes. That is to say, everything Fahrenheit 9/11 is not! I’m not at all saying it’s a bad movie or that Michael Moore didn’t create a good movie…I mean…DOCUMENTARY.

That’s why they created that category, especially to acknowledge directors who made documentaries. It wasn’t that long ago when they weren’t even recognized.

The Oscars are about acting, and above all about great cinematography, which doesn’t mean taking a camera crew around interviewing people about some president’s time in office and splicing together some clips from news channels. Moore knows that he’s basically a shoe in for Best Documentary, but I think he’s insulting everyone that spent this year releasing a documentary by saying his movie is better than theirs and should be up for Best Picture.


Oh, and maybe it’s just me, but I thought Super Size Me was better than Fahrenheit 9/11 anyways.



Note: I'm not insulting Moore for his movie, as a movie. I'm ONLY insulting his descision to demand his movie be up for Best Picture.

[toychoke]

Yeah, I will admit that is kind of funny.

While yes his fil could be considered for Best Picture. I do tend to agree with you in terms of how it would fail. I doesn't supply any innovative new actors, or supply a form of cinematography that out does the rest. Even if he did get them to consider it for the award, I don't see them giving it to him, simply because it lacks the necessary elements that generally make a "Best Picture."

Eh, same old silly crap that exists with almost everything in this nation. Sometimes you just have to laugh at the world and it's asses =P

[Palmer of the Turks]

Super Size Me is NOT a documentary, it's a brilliant exercise in spin-doctoring.

[Lone_Raider]

Originally posted by Palmer of the Turks@Sep 7 2004, 01:10 AM
Super Size Me is NOT a documentary, it's a brilliant exercise in spin-doctoring.
I've not seen Super Size me but doesn't the guy eat McDonalds 3 times a day for 2 months or something like that? The very first thought that came to my mind was that even McDonalds doesn't recommend or promote eating at their restaurant 3 times a day for 2 months! And 99% of the population realizes that eating McDonalds 3 times a week will lead you straight to the Coronary ward at the hospital.

So what was he trying to prove? I knew the results of this behaviour without watching a "documentary".

[Bravehearter]

I think for this you have to take a step back. Why shouldnt Moore go for it? How many times have you watched the Oscars and hear about them celebrating 'Going to the movies..' they dont specify which kind of movies. Just because its a documentary doesnt mean that people wernt entertained. Michael Moore isnt about to to go and star in the next Ron Howard movie, so if he wants an oscar why not try for it?

Not only was I entertained seeing this movie, but educated as well. (Now dont jump down my throat about lies in this movie, yeah Im not doubting there was some creative editing. But there was also a lot of facts and things that I found interesting and went out and looked up myself.

So when I go into most movies I get entertained, and emotional impact if its a good movie. In Fahrenheit I laughed, was shocked, and certain parts just made me choke up, so in my eyes, its a great movie, deserving of the nomination.

The jury in Cannes didnt seem to mind giving him the best picture award. It was a GOOD movie, just because it was a documentary in my opinion doesnt mean that it shouldnt go after best picture. Because other then some acting, the movie has everything else.

I say hey good for him, this is going to do amazing things for Documentaries in theaters, and I think its great. More power to him.

[kuju]

films entered in foreign film category can also go for best picture... look at A Beautiful Life....

[Palmer of the Turks]

Originally posted by Lone_Raider@Sep 7 2004, 05:43 AM
I've not seen Super Size me but doesn't the guy eat McDonalds 3 times a day for 2 months or something like that?

So what was he trying to prove? I knew the results of this behaviour without watching a "documentary".
It was less than a month, but yeah. He deliberately stacked the deck to get the results he wanted.

http://www.liquidcalories.com/

There's proof that McDonalds is not responsible for everything Spurlock claims.

[Jebus]

Originally posted by kuju@Sep 7 2004, 12:36 PM
films entered in foreign film category can also go for best picture... look at A Beautiful Life....
foreign film...documentary...foreign film...documentary

ummm...you made absolutely no point with that remark. A foreign film is just like a movie that would be made in English...but it was made in another language. How can you compare the two? It still has actors, great directing, costumes, and most importantly a good plot...it's just in a different language.

How is that anything like a documentary?

[The Original Taco]

I think it's a stupid idea too, he just wants to push his opinion on more people than he already has.

[Jebus]

Originally posted by The Original Taco@Sep 7 2004, 03:41 PM
I think it's a stupid idea too, he just wants to push his opinion on more people than he already has.
Oh yeah, it’s definitely more a propaganda move than him actually wanting the award. First he was mad because it got an R rating, which it definitely deserved, now he’s made that he has to “settle” for being up for Best Documentary. He wants his movie to get more attention, and more importantly attack Bush in every way he can, and that’s not what Best Picture is about. 90% of why he wants this award is due to alterative motives. He wants to get up on that podium and attack Bush some more…come off it.

[kuju]

I'm not saying I support it, I don't. But the definition of Best Picture is sketchy, and technially, his could qualify. I don't think it comes even CLOSE to meriting the award, or even a nomination however. I, personally, found Bowling for Columbine much more entertaining. though that's besides the point too I suppose.

[ProstheticMind]

This is stupid because its so highly unlikely that his film will be nominated for best picture, and when it doesn't, it'll become some kind of stupid press scandal with Moore claiming that the only reason it wasn't nominated was because of its political content. Or something. But technically, that film can't be nominated for best documentary anyway, and Bowling for Columbine shouldn't technically have won best documentary either, because the anacemy rules specifically state that documentaries are supposed to be completely unbiased views of the subject matter, which his films aren't clearly not.

I may agree with his political views, but Michael Moore is still just a bastard publicity hound. In fact, I'm tired of him being the celebrity spokesperson for the Democrats. Somebody needs to bring back Rage Against the Machine or something. :rocker:

[toychoke]

If Rage Against the Machine actually revived you have no idea how happy I'd be =P.

Next to Weezer they are one of my all time favorite bands. Yeah I know that's a wierd stretch. Rage being much better musicians and all, but Weezer has something that I really like =P.

It's too bad that they decided that they didnt' have anything to Rage against anymore =P

[Gunny]

I will just say that this ploy by Michael Moore shows the extent of his lack of intelligence, class, and merit as a filmmaker. Frankly, as a filmmaker, it insults me that he cannot get off his soapbox and follow the Academy's rules. It doesn't even matter what my political opinion of him is. This is just an example of his selfish, attention-whoring nature. Leave the Best Picture category to the real filmmakers.

[Rammstein39]

I totally agree. Moore needs to shut the hell up. It is def. a way to get attention and bash Bush. Makes me sick.....

[Jebus]

Originally posted by ProstheticMind@Sep 8 2004, 02:49 AM
I may agree with his political views, but Michael Moore is still just a bastard publicity hound. In fact, I'm tired of him being the celebrity spokesperson for the Democrats. Somebody needs to bring back Rage Against the Machine or something. :rocker:
Hell ya we need a little RATM right now...*tear*

[toychoke]

I love his political talk. I mean any person that's willing to bring attention to things that the government does is good. I wouldn't care if it was anti-democrat, or anti-republican. As long as there is someone out there that's making people think aobut their government. so that the American people don't get lazy and thus allow the government to fall below the American ideal. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. IT'S NOT OUR JOB TO TRUST THE GOVERNMENT, IT'S THE GOVERNMENTS JOB TO GIVE US REASONS TO TRUST THEM.

The founding fathers established a government in which the people could not only question the government, but force change through elections. They never intended for people to blindly trust the politicians to do the right thing. I mean they just got finished fighting a war over the fact that they couldn't trust the government to do what was right by them.

So I mean michael Moore is doing just fine, just like anyone else who would question the motives of the government. I mean what he does on the side, eh. I could honestly care less if he wanted an oscar. The truth is that the oscars are screwed up anyways. They are in a constant state of I'm sorry with the actors and directors and producers. I don't even watch them anymore because I always feel like they are screwing over this years best candidate, in order to make up by giving a not so good movie the award, just to say sorry tot he nominee who had a better movie the year before.

[goofball]

whether or not moore's film should be up for best picture is an artistic debate

BUT it is obviously eligible. they have awards for cinematography, for acting, for writing and so forth.

best picture is just that, best picture, any category.

[meeso]

I think it's rediculous because Michael Moore is a child molester... but it's ok cause he's Mr. 911 man.

[Bravehearter]

A Child Molester? are you on crack?


Take your useless comments somewhere else.

[MuthaFranka]

As a hard left person, I'm not even going to comment, because the academy awards are shit anyway.

It's a rare even when the best film actually wins anyway.

[meeso]

Originally posted by Bravehearter@Sep 23 2004, 03:23 PM
A Child Molester? are you on crack?


Take your useless comments somewhere else.
Aww come on. They are only useless if you find nothing useful in them.

I personally found something useful in it, therefore it's not a useless comment.

And no I'm not on crack... *shrug* I'm really tired of hearing that gay expression.

[Anthropolemic]

I know I didn't find anything useful in them. I guess that's two against one! Character assassination is lame, meeso.

[meeso]

Originally posted by Anthropolemic@Sep 30 2004, 01:39 AM
I know I didn't find anything useful in them. I guess that's two against one! Character assassination is lame, meeso.
Unless you are talking about michael moore.

Then it's a necessity.