Film: Capitalism: A Love Story

[marsmellow]

Nobody is yet to respond to this question:

If he cares so much about his subject matter then why doesn't he use the profits from these films to help the people he's documenting?

He does help the people he's documenting. And he also helps by using his money to make movies which convince people to support things like universal healthcare and workplace democracy.

But why doesn't he use it to directly help EVERYONE who has these problems? I'm guessing it's because he can't do it all by himself. He's not so rich that he can help all the disadvantaged people in the USA. He could use his money to give healthcare to some people for a while, or he could make a movie to create political pressure on politicians to provide universal healthcare. That would help a lot more people than just donating to a healthcare charity.

Besides which I also made comments specifically about different parts of "Capitalism: A Love Story". I also asked questions that haven't been answered.

Why the interview with Wallace Shawn?

Why cut to the footage of naive 1950's housewives?

This stuff is irrelevant. Do you have any problem with the main message of the movie, or do you just like to nitpick and attack the messenger?

So, you don't like Moore and you don't like the way he makes his movies. Okay, we get that. But it really makes no difference, because there are plenty of movies and books that basically say the same thing, and they weren't made by Michael Moore. The main point of the movie is still true.

I realize that it's not a crime for Moore or anyone to criticize capitalism. But his critique is off. You can't re-arrange footage from old movies and propaganda films, people being evicted, Wallace Shawn, condo vultures, etc. and narrate over the top of it "This is Capitalism"

It's misleading.

That IS part of capitalism. How is it misleading? You haven't bothered to explain that.

 

[TheDeceased]

He does help the people he's documenting. And he also helps by using his money to make movies which convince people to support things like universal healthcare and workplace democracy.

I responded to this the first time you said it. He doesn't use his money to make these films that supposedly help people. He uses investors money.

http://blog.mlive.com/flint-city-beat/2009/10/20_years_after_roger_me_films.html

Do you have any problem with the main message of the movie, or do you just like to nitpick and attack the messenger?

I don't think that the film effectively delivers a message, not a very compelling one anyway. I'm not nitpicking. I really thought it was an incredibly sloppily constructed, propaganda-like, patronizing, manipulative pile of steaming horse shit. Yes, in other words - I really disliked both the content and the style of the documentary. In fact, technically I don't think it is a documentary.

there are plenty of movies and books that basically say the same thing, and they weren't made by Michael Moore.

So even though you admit that he's providing nothing new, you still insist that he's helping people by informing them of what they are already been told by countless other books/ movies?

Or is he different somehow because he's a fat smart ass and people are more likely to watch his films than some intellectual that the general public can't relate to?

That IS part of capitalism. How is it misleading? You haven't bothered to explain that.

I didn't bother to explain it because it requires no explanation. It's obviously misleading. You can argue that he's not a liar. He is (see the links I provided earlier), but you can't argue that his films aren't at least a little misleading. Can you?

Seriously?

I'm amazed about the level of blind devotion towards Moore on this site.

It's misleading because it's very selective. He's not filming himself eating a cheeseburger in his Hollywood mansion, he's filming people being evicted from their houses and splicing that together with stock footage from the 1950s, small snippets of political speeches that are completely out of context and narrating over it "This is capitalism."

I don't know how you can deny that that is misleading.

His work is strikingly similar in structure and technique to propaganda films.

You can say that the ends justifies the means. It's probably how Moore justifies intentionally lying through mass media. And maybe the end does justify the means. I don't think so. After all, what's the end here aside from money in his pocket.

The good people of Flint Michigan don't appear to be too fond of him.

Maybe he's not doing any good.

Maybe he's just making a healthy profit.

 

[marsmellow]

I don't think that the film effectively delivers a message, not a very compelling one anyway.

Well maybe it would be more clear to you if you had watched the entire movie, instead of walking out halfway through.

So even though you admit that he's providing nothing new, you still insist that he's helping people by informing them of what they are already been told by countless other books/ movies?

No, a lot of people haven't heard this message before, because they haven't seen those documentaries and they haven't read those books. Moore dumbs down his movies and makes them humorous so they will reach the broadest audience possible. That's why his movies are so popular compared to other documentaries. Because they are easy to understand. So, he isn't really saying anything new, but he is doing something new in bringing the message to a wider, less-educated audience.

I didn't bother to explain it because it requires no explanation. It's obviously misleading.

LOL!! :D

Okay then, it's misleading. No further explanation needed. Things like foreclosures, pilots who live in poverty, for-profit prisons, political corruption and dead peasant insurance, those aren't related to uncontrolled capitalism. That should have been obvious to me. 8)

 

[L2R]

yes, td, please watch the entire thing before jumping to conclusions. thanks for those links, i'll check them out when i get a chance. four day weekend actually means more work for me at the moment.