Thursday, January 27, 2011
Michael Moore, Role Model
As someone who has naively never seem any films my Michael Moore, let me tell you, I’m not planning on it anytime soon. This article, “Michael Moore, Role Model” by Peter Schweizer, has done an exceptional job at quickly pointing out every flaw of Moore and his cynical view on the world in general. This article specifically focuses on racism which is apparently “rampant in america” according to Moore’s life philosophy. Moore seems to explicitly enjoy pointing out each and every one of americas flaws without turning around the magnifying glass and the pointer finger and examining his own flaws. The greatest example in this article is Moores own target, the only 5 percent of blacks in american journalism, however the journalists takes matters into his own hands and evaluates Moores crew of each of his film and quickly learns that Moore is well below his projected five percent in his own life. Also, Moore judges America as a whole on their supposed acceptance of african americans in their neighborhood yet looking at his own neighborhood there is not a single black resident. The final point of the article contains Moors supposed lack of involvement in that evil ploy of capitalism called the stock market. However, with his apparent, not that dedicated, non-profit he doesn’t follow his owl rule and ends up giving back to those very companies he blames for taking advantage of americans. The point of this article isn’t just to slam Michael Moore for being a hypocrite, there is a goal. And that goal consists of making sure the avid fans take the advice of Moore with consideration of what he believes.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I found it very interesting to see what critics had to say about Michael Moore. While reading the article I found, it seems as if Moore chooses to focus on issues that are widely interesting to people of all ages; Pieces that you would expect to get a good audience and positive feedback. However, it seems as if it tends to be the opposite. Critic Kevin Mattson gave his thoughts on Moores work ethic and why he believes it is not a successful one. Mattson strongly believes that Moore "Blurs the line between political criticism and entertainment." In many of his documentaries, Moore goes as far as to make some of the facts fiction just in order to keep the audience interested and entertained. In the case of Bowling for Columbine, the opening scene is exaggerated greatly and the whereabouts of the gunsmen prior to the shooting was told by police to be false. This is an issue because yes, people watch films in order to be entertained, but they also watch documentaries to get the true facts about a situation and to be able to take a stand based on those facts. Mattson also goes on to criticize his confrontations when the "big men" in his films. In almost all of them it seems as if his will to pursue ends up leaving him father behind then where he started. Because he badgers the CEO's, Moore is usually left talking with someone of no importance in the issue the film is concerned with watering down his message. What i got from this article was that if Moore would be more concerned with getting his facts and selling a message rather than entertaining his audience his films would be much more successful and enlightening.
ReplyDeleteThe article "Michael Moore's Jesus Land" by Doug Krieger paints Michael Moore as an uncaring, insensitive jerk. It mockingly portrays Moore as someone who not only disrespects others religions, but disrespects democracy as well. While I have never seen this particular documentary, I have to agree with Krieger based on my experiences with Moore's documentaries. I have never been someone particularly involved or interested in politics, and I think making films with radical political implications makes the maker of the film come off as looking both radical and insensitive. Moore proposes that America will become a Christian inhabitant only land and that people of all other religions will move north to Canada. Coming from someone whose family originally emigrated to this country to escape religious prosecution, this offends me. This article furthered my view that Michael is a political radical whose claims do more than just subvert the dominant paradigm; they offend people who have every right to have whatever political view they may have. I agree with Krieger’s stance that Michael Moore comes off as insensitive to others views and obnoxious about his own.
ReplyDeleteMichael Moore is genuinely disliked by both liberals and republicans alike. His radical views and multiple offensive documentaries make him a loathed public figure and someone who is certainly not a role model for our generation nor the generation to come. Almost every article I came across portrayed him a negative light. One should take any of his documentaries in stride, because he is very serious about all the radical claims that he makes. He also never accepts any blame for himself and always puts himself above the problem he is complaining about. Michael Moore sets a bad example and after reading this article I now both dislike him as a person and documentarian.