Michael Moore unveils title of his new documentary

[DesertRat]

Michael Moore's opting to spoof romantic conventions in titling his upcoming documentary "Capitalism: A Love Story," which addresses the causes of the global economic meltdown.

"It will be the perfect date movie," Moore said in an announcement Wednesday. "It's got it all -- lust, passion, romance and 14,000 jobs being eliminated every day. It's a forbidden love, one that dare not speak its name. Heck, let's just say it: It's capitalism."

Moore and Overture Films had announced previously that the film would be released domestically on Oct. 2 -- a year and a day after the U.S. Senate voted to approve a $700 billion bailout of Wall Street. Paramount Vantage will handle international distribution.

The film is described as focusing on "the disastrous impact that corporate dominance and out-of-control profit motives have on the lives of Americans and citizens of the world."

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118005798.html?categoryid=1238&cs=1

[Archae]

1. Another bullshit Moore "documentary..."

:eyes:

[napoleon_in_rags]

2. I think you forgot the sarcasm tag... nt

[wroberts189]

13. He must have. Moore's movies are fact checked by teams of lawyers. nt

[chimpymustgo]

75. Yeah, just ask Sanjay Gupta.

[Jefferson23]

93. hee hee

[wroberts189]

128. Did you forget the sarcasm tag as well?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanjay_Gupta#Michael_Moore_dispute

CNN released a statement in response to Michael Moore's rebuttal. In it, they apologized for an error in their on-air report, having stated that in the film Moore reported Cuba spends $25 per person for health care when the film actually gave that number as $251. CNN attributed this to a transcription error. CNN defended the rest of Gupta's report and issued a point-by-point response to Moore's response in which CNN contended that Moore's comparison of data from different sources in different years was in effect "cherry picking" results, at the cost of statistical accuracy.

However, Michael Moore re-explains the entire issue on his website. First, Dr. Gupta's allegation, "Well, I mean, he pulls $251 from this BBC unsourced report ... Where you pulled the $251 number was a BBC report, which, by the way, stated that the per capita spending in the United States was $5,700. You chose not to use the $5,700 from one report and chose to go to a totally different report and you're sort of cherry picking data from different reports ... Well, why didn't you use the $5,700 number from the BBC report?" To which Moore responds by explaining, "Actually, the number 'Sicko' cited for per capita Cuban spending on health care - $251, a number widely cited by the BBC and other outlets - comes from the United Nations Human Development Report, helpfully linked on our website. Here it is again: http://hdr.undp.org/hdr2006/statistics/indicators/52.html. That UN report does list American health care spending as only $5,700, but it's a few years old. Since then, the U.S. government has updated its projections for health care spending, to $7,498 in 2007. So we used that number. It's the most recent, and comes right from the Department of Health and Human Services. If the Cuban government gave a figure on 2007 projected health spending, we'd have used it.<26>

[DissedByBush]

115. They are pretty good lawyers

And they've gotten better. Now he can spin the truth right up until the breaking point but not step over the line so nobody can claim outright deception.

I'm still a Moore fan though. It's still good entertainment even when you see through the BS.

[newtothegame]

119. Agreed. Would like Michael Moore more if he felt he could fairly present...

all the facts of an issue instead of just what he wants you to see to agree with his side. Instead he seems afraid to give you all the facts, for fear that you might only partially agree with him, instead of lock-step it.

[Grinchie]

121. "I'm a big fan of Michael Moore, despite his Deception"

Man that is too funny. Do you take stupidity lessons to be that good at it?

Hah hah ahahahahhahahahahahaha

[DissedByBush]

131. What? He is entertaining and does make some good points

Unfortunately he tends to tarnish the good points through his little deceptions and give the RW talking points against him.

[wroberts189]

129. Can you give an example of this? nt

[DissedByBush]

132. A good example was Cuba

In reality their health care system is pretty run-down, hospitals in shambles, people having to bring their own supplies, pharmacies mostly empty. Moore got the foreigner's tour, not what an average Cuban would really get.

But he did portray his experience. He left out that it was atypical, but how could he know if he didn't research?

The sad part is that it is not necessarily that such a health care system can't work, but that the larger economic system can't work and takes the health care system down with it.

Now go back to Bowling for Columbine and he did some obvious doozies that were very easy to point out as intentional deception.

[wroberts189]

142. But he showed they were in shambles.. and Cuba is under an emabargo.

And point was they are getting free health care and we are not. That's why he took the 9/11 firefighters there. It all looked pretty sincere and typical too me.

He also went to many other countries and most of Sicko and his other movies are him letting other people talk... not him.

Any other Examples? Like a simple basic lie?

[DissedByBush]

144. You can't find simple lies anymore

He's much more careful after his blatant lies in Columbine. He can explain away every misrepresentation in his newer films.

You succumbed to one of the defenses. "And the point was." Lies are okay as long as they don't detract from the point.

The problem is that lies and misrepresentations don't belong in documentaries. That is why I don't consider Moore's films to be documentaries.

We do have a serious health care problem here and Moore did expose quite a bit of it. He doesn't need to misrepresent and lie, but he somehow feels the need to do it anyway.

[wroberts189]

145. Former CIGNA executive says Michael Moore was right all along ...

Others feel Moore did an excellent job...




http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6045399

'He talks about how a lot of these executives, including himself, are so removed from the real world, that the insured are no more than just numbers.

And that was my problem. I had been in the industry and I'd risen up in the ranks. And I had a great job. And I had a terrific office in a high-rise building in Philadelphia. I was insulated. I didn't really see what was going on. I saw the data. I knew that 47 million people were uninsured, but I didn't put faces with that number.

Then he says that everything about Canada and England that was reported in Michael Moore's Sicko was true and that they made a costly and concerted effort to derail the message of the movie.

We shouldn't fear government involvement in our health care system. There is an appropriate role for government, and it's been proven in the countries that were in that movie.

Potter then goes on in a very calm manner to indict the entire insurance industry for putting profit before people.'

[DissedByBush]

146. That's part of my point

Michael Moore made some good points in the film, which makes it all the stranger that he felt the need to deceive.

[Bjorn Against]

3. Well in the past Moore's "bullshit" has always been a hell of a lot more accurate than Fox or CNN

[Archae]

5. Which isn't saying much.

"Hearts and Minds" is a documentary. And a damn good one.

Moore's films are deceptively-edited "Hey everybody! Look over here at my fat face!" movie with maybe a few facts thrown in.

[napoleon_in_rags]

9. Are you kidding?

Its not that Moore's films don't feature himself or advance ideas along with presenting facts, its that 24/7 EVERY DAY on television ideas, usually commercial ones, are being advanced without presenting any facts AT ALL. If you think Moore is any kind of anomaly in this regard you are clearly wrong.

[Lorien]

34. Ah, I see that "Ignored" is busy stirring things up again!

some things never change, huh?

[Canuckistanian]

61. Don't worry. You're not missing much

Just another "I don't want to see Michael Moore's fat face" post.

[MarjorieG]

10. Important nuggets, always. Nixon hyping Kaiser Permanente for having the right idea; charging for

health care and not having to deliver, or Bush friends and implications for Iraq, Carlyle, etc....

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

11. It's not Michael Moore's fault Charleton Heston was a crazy racist.

Time to get over it.

[JVS]

17. +100

[Bluenorthwest]

67. Heston was a gun activist with Alzeheimer's

but to my knowledge he was not a racist. Do you have some form of proof that Heston, who had on screen inter racial romance in an era when many people would not see a film with such a thing in it, was a racist?
Flinging mud is fun for some, I know, but the thing is the mud has to stick.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

116. Hoo boy.

"Do you have some form of proof that Heston, who had on screen inter racial romance in an era when many people would not see a film with such a thing in it, was a racist?"

Yeah, the scene from "Bowling for Coumbine" where Charleton Heston blames gun violence on skin color.

[Grinchie]

122. So was Ronnie Raygunn

He sold guns to everybody in the world. Hell, he gave them away to many in the world!

[DissedByBush]

133. Racist? Heston was with MLK on the march to DC in 63.

He even picketed segregated restaurants.

He fought racism back when it had the potential to hurt his career.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

134. Yeah, and then he became a racist.

Deal with it.

[DissedByBush]

135. I saw he was still against racism

When he realized that not only whites can be racist.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

136. That doesn't even make any sense.

Heston had Alzheimers.

What's your excuse?

[DissedByBush]

137. Only whites can be racist, right? n/t

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

138. Can Chinese Jews play the bag pipes?

What does this have to do with Charleton Heston and his apologists being racists?

[Forkboy]

141. LOL...that's got to be a trick question of some sort.

;)

[DissedByBush]

143. Heston later started speaking out against racism against whites

I still haven't heard any evidence he was himself racist.

[Bjorn Against]

12. Well if the best you can do is attack his "fat face" I suspect you haven't even watched his movies

If you really had a case to make against Moore then I think you could do better than attack his weight, but Moore's films have actually been thoroughly researched and fact checked. Sure he has made a couple of mistakes in the past, but the overwhelming bulk of his work is very well documented.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

89. I am surprised the poster has 1000+ posts n/t

[Grinchie]

123. He donated heavily to DU to get the count bumped.. J/K

I Kid! I Kid!

No seriously, you have to hand it to the trolls and spies for their tenacity.

And don't forget, now that their is no doubt whatsoever that the DLC is reborn inside the Obama Administration, Michael Moore is now on the attack list, just like Dean and Kucinich. Sadly, those are the only ones who aren't owned by the DLC....

[wroberts189]

20. How about you elaborate a bit on your position?

Sounds like troll bait to me.

[DCKit]

50. Geez. I don't like him personally, but don't shoot the messenger.

I can't imagine how far Dick, 43* and the corporate criminals might have gone without Michael Moore blowing the whistle. We'd probably be dealing with pResident McCain (or Palin, by now) without the information he's provided. And we barely squeaked by in the last election.

He's provided a valuable service by opening a lot of eyes - people who might have otherwise/previously got all their information from the corporate M$M.

If anything, he hasn't made enough films or covered enough of the important topics.

[info being]

51. Maybe they hit a bit close to home for you

[RufusTFirefly]

58. Shoot the messenger! Way to go. That'll accomplish a lot, I'm sure. n/t

[City Lights]

60. How mature.

:eyes:

[Canuckistanian]

63. Bravo! Ad hominem attacks always win an argument

"Fat face"??

[kenfrequed]

64. I'm glad

You seem to have mastered the art of spitting out the mainstream media, Faux news, and southparks stupid generalizations without bother to actually watch the movies, analyze the issues, or inform yourself.

Kudos to you!!!

[NoSheep]

70. Could be because he's the only one with the BALLS to be in them.

[LanternWaste]

74. I'm sure we all think we know what bias is and is not...

I'm sure we all think we know what bias is and is not... until it runs counter to our own rigid dogma.

[grahamhgreen]

76. Wow, what an articulate and fact filled comment. nt

[Divine Discontent]

106. "look over here at my fat face" - you're a judgmental person - clearly. hoping you'll be banned. nt

[The Doctor.]

108. You just love getting attention... that's it, isn't it?

Other than that, it'd be great if you could, well... prove that Moore had lied or deceived at all.

I'm sure we'll all be waiting a LONG time for your response.

[DUlover2909]

112. "Whatever" is all I can muster up.

Why bother with an argument?

[donheld]

113. Are your eyes brown

cuz your completely full of shit.

[proud2BlibKansan]

114. WTF

[Hugabear]

14. Michael Moore speaks truth to power

His documentaries, that you so casually dismiss, have helped expose many injustices in this country, and helped to bring important topics to the forefront. You may not like his methods, but he is quite effective at generating public interest in important topics.

[Archae]

26. So the ends justifies the means?

Back in the 80's, I saw a "documentary" on PBS that had been produced by "Accuracy In Media," the far-right group that still is looking for commies under their beds.
The film laid the blame for the Vietnam fiasco RIGHT where it belonged! :sarcasm:
"The Liberal Media"

Moore goes into a subject with a fixed point of view, and will selectively edit and even outright *LIE* to advocate for that position.
Just like AIM did with their Vietnam film.

I haven't any such criticisms of "Sicko" yet, then again, I haven't been looking.

But his "Bowling For Columbine" was the worst.
And not because of the Heston interview.
Moore flat-out *LIED* in that film. And no, I'm not going to list the lies and selective edits, it's been done many times, and not just by conservative and pro-gun groups.

So as all of you can guess, I hold out no real hope Moore will honestly point out who is to blame for the financial fiascoes, and as usual, most of the film will have the camera pointed at Moore.

[devilgrrl]

28. Please list the lies and selective edits - I haven't seen them yet.

:popcorn:

[Hugabear]

40. I think you scared him away

Funny that.

[The Doctor.]

109. Yeah... that'll happen.

Not really.

[DissedByBush]

139. The bank scene for one was full of them

The guns are not normally stored at the bank, but in a central vault far away. When she said they were in the bank's vault she was not talking about the local branch.

Normally the gun is shipped to a dealer for the customer to pick up.

No regular customer could walk in and walk out with a gun as Moore did. The normal waiting period is a week to ten days.

Everything involving the physical gun on site was done specifically for this segment of the movie, arranged weeks in advance.

[ContinentalOp]

31. You seem to be on the verge of understanding something important but it's just beyond your grasp.

This absolute objective purity you're seeking is an impossibility. It's a myth. Yes, Moore has a point of view, as does every journalist. That's a good thing.

[DIKB]

32. If he has lied, then please explain

HOW THE EVER LOVING FUCK HE WASN'T SUED TO KINGDOM HELL FOR IT??

Libel and Slander, check it out.

What I took away from Bowling for Columbine was a movie that damned the atmosphere of fear we have created here in the U.S.

I have watched MANY documentaries, and the camera invariably comes upon the presenter. Is that a problem you have, with a central figure, or are you a fattist?

"I'm not going to list the lies and selective edits, it's been done many times, and not just by conservative and pro-gun groups."

Funny, I've ONLY heard them from pro-gun groups and conservatives, bring facts or go home. Blind baseless accusations, fueled by little more than you're hatred of seeing Michael Moore front and center will not fly here.

[appal_jack]

36. I agree that 'Columbine' was comparatively weak, BUT

I agree that 'Columbine' was comparatively weak, BUT 'Roger & Me' was absolutely brilliant and far ahead of its time in addressing union busting and the deindustrialization of America by 'American' capitalists. F911 was heroic truth-speaking to power at a time when too many Americans were 'watching what they say.'

You are painting Michael Moore with a mighty broad brush. I disagree with your overall assessment of him.

This thread has convinced me to add 'Sicko' to my Netflix queue. I had refrained from watching it before, as I feel quite familiar with the issue of health care, but I'm going to watch it with an eye for Moore's fact presentation and style. I'm fairly confident that I'll be impressed...

-app

[ContinentalOp]

42. Columbine was weak compared to what?

What other documentary of the past couple decades would you say tops it? I would say it's his best work and the most significant documentary since The Thin Blue Line, although probably topped a couple of years later by The Power of Nightmares.

[appal_jack]

86. Moore's points in Columbine were muddled...

Did you even read my reply before knee-jerking? In it I said that I admired Roger & Me and F911 as documentaries/polemics. I'll say it again: they are brilliant and relevant films.

However with Columbine, going for the cheap shots against an old man (Charlton Heston) in his own home made Moore look like an asshole (which I generally don't think he is).

And if the point of Columbine was that American culture had a streak of fear and violence that is at the root of the 'gun problem,' then what the hell was the point of that demonstration against ammo sales at K-mart? That whole segment undermines the 'we aren't after your guns, we just want to reduce the violence,' argument that Moore and supporters sometimes used. Reducing law-abiding gun owners access to supplies doesn't help anyone except K-Mart's competitors (indeed most of the (rare) occasions I enter Wal Mart are to buy ammo - I hardly patronize them otherwise due to all their negative environmental/labor/community practices).

So there are two weak points I recall, and it's been years since I've watched Columbine. I'm pretty certain there were other flaws to the film, but that's all I recall right now.

-app

[info being]

52. Maybe you should show him how it's done

[liberalmike27]

124. Freeper

You get conditioned to the idea the media is liberal, by the media. If they are trying to con you, then why would they themselves be the one with the message that the media is liberal.
Moore probably sounds like BS to you, because you are used to the corporate media, where the truth is regularly hidden from view, especially economically speaking.

[ControlledDemolition]

98. His methods are a heck of a lot more benign than f*ckwits like O'Reilly/Limbaugh et al. n/t

[earth mom]

18. You're on the wrong website if you believe that.

:wtf:

FYI-Freepers hate Michael Moore and they suck!!! :puke:

[Archae]

27. Freepers hate Moore because they are stupid.

[Bjorn Against]

33. Well we can agree on one thing at least...

I just hope you realize that comment does not reflect real well on you when it is viewed alongside your previous comments about Moore.

:rofl:

[earth mom]

44. And you hate Michael Moore because...?

You might want to look in the mirror on this one.

[Faygo Kid]

82. And you think you are smart with these posts?

Don't think so, pal.

Sorry you have such an obsession about Michael Moore that you have to post multiple times. He makes great movies, and does great community work, like establishing the film festival noted below, and giving back in so many ways.

You can look it up. I suspect it's all about guns for you. But then again, I don't really care what it's about for you. Just go post elsewhere.

[ContinentalOp]

30. I think you know nothing about the history of the documentary film. -nt-

[redqueen]

54. Nope... sure knows a lot about rightwing talking points, though. (nt)

[slampoet]

37. Spoken like a jerk who has never seen Flint Michigan.

[ColbertWatcher]

39. LOL! I know, huh? Although, I wonder ...

... with so many faults and mistakes in his documentaries, why is it that no one has ever been able to win a suit against him or his films?

[ControlledDemolition]

99. This question answers all his critics beautifully! n/t

[OwnedByFerrets]

49. You're on the wrong forum for this shit.

[redqueen]

53. Wow.

[calimary]

57. Where's the "unrecommend" for this post?

That of course assumes you even can recommend or unrecommend an individual post, I know... I know...

[Dr.Phool]

87. I think it's on the top line, to the right of the user name.

It's got a head silhouette with a red "X" on it.

[DesertRat]

126. That would be the ignore the user button

The unrecommend is right next to the recommend button.

[fascisthunter]

62. please enlighten us all

well, suspicions were on the mark.

[RagAss]

78. When was he wrong? Huh? When??????

[spiritual_gunfighter]

88. Bill O'Reilly? n/t

[ControlledDemolition]

97. His movies have definitely fertilized my mind! n/t

[glitch]

100. There should be a "joke" smilie

Because sometimes "sarcasm" doesn't always apply. And rofl is way overused.

[snake in the grass]

102. Another bullshit Moore "documentary..."

...which I can't wait to see. Maybe you prefer Fox News?

[ControlledDemolition]

130. Numb-skulls prefer FOX! Lobotomized people prefer FOX!! n/t

[qanda]

105. What would be real nice is if we could unrecommend individual posts

And if they get enough negatives then they'll be collapsed and only seen if we choose to torture ourselves with their inanity.

[JDPriestly]

107. DUers please DU Google Archae's 1000 posts.

Here's one.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x4428415 for starts

[Matariki]

120. Archea

:eyes:

[Hugabear]

127. I see the right-wing troll has run scared with his tail between his legs

Typical right-wing hack-job. Make a couple of anti-Moore claims, but when called upon to back up your assertions, run like a scared little chickenshit.

[Cleita]

4. I'm looking forward to it. Michael never fails to get to the bottom

of the issue and then make it understandable to the densest of Freepers even though they insist on not understanding it.

[DesertRat]

7. Me too. I've enjoyed all of his films. n/t

[Archae]

8. Like Moore's smear film about guns?

[wroberts189]

15. Whaa? He is a member of the NRA and owns a gun. nt

[Cleita]

16. You mean about Columbine? You are really going to have to do better

than this.

[Hugabear]

21. Okay, now we see where you're coming from

Now run along and have a nice day.

[PSzymeczek]

22. Helfreakinlo?

Fact check time for you!

[Bjorn Against]

23. Did you even watch "Bowling for Columbine"?

It is not a "smear film about guns", it is a movie about the causes of violence in America and it explores violence from multiple angles without pointing the finger at any one particular cause. If you watched the movie you would know that Moore is actually a gun owner himself, while the NRA would not agree with everything in the movie it is certainly not an anti-gun film.

[redqueen]

56. People who spew talking points seldom know what the hell they're talking about. (nt)

[baldguy]

81. He just read the NRA fund raising letter about it.

Or was it the GOP fund raising letter?

[mmonk]

140. Same thing.

[devilgrrl]

25. It what way was it a smear? It wasn't so much about guns but our culture of FEAR!

You're :crazy:

[LeftyMom]

41. Oooh, that explains it.

:eyes:

[provis99]

43. spoken like a typical gun nut.

Now go home and massage your throbbing Mossberg 12 gauge as you think about Charlton Heston.

[tkmorris]

45. Ahhhh. NOW I get where your irrationality stems from

Sacred cows are still just cows my fine feathered friend. Objectivity requires that you see a thing from a point of view other than your own.

[Forkboy]

47. Ahhh, there's the root of your posts.

[NoSheep]

71. Are you the MOST uninformed troll on this board?

congratulations

[vssmith]

73. Just a question

Do you belong to the NRA? I am sure many liberals do--I am just asking.

[Faygo Kid]

84. Yep, I knew it.

Should have waited until I came to this post until I replied. Although I guessed right (wasn't difficult).

You don't know what the hell you're talking about, but that didn't stop you from hijacking this thread. Go ahead and start your own on this subject.

Let's see how many positive recommendations you end up with.

[sybylla]

104. You know, I never got that perspective from the Columbine doc.

Moore made it pretty clear that Canada has more or less the same lifestyle regarding guns there as we do here, yet drawing a gun isn't their first instinct. The movie taken as a whole came across to me as a vindication for guns and a clear condemnation of our fear-ridden, self-absorbed society that chooses to employ them as we too often do.

[proud2BlibKansan]

117. Oh you mean the film that won an Academy Award?

:)

[CoffeeCat]

6. Is the economy the topic...

...that will find the left/right and Democrats/Republicans holding hands and singing Kumbaya???

Could Moore galvanize the two parties into one efficient protesting machine?

When that does happen--all bets are off. That's when the revolution begins.

[earth mom]

19. Go Mike!!! You ROCK!!!

:yourock:

[NJCher]

24. this is gonna' be good!

I love the idea of portraying it as a "love affair." It really is the perfect metaphor.


Cher

[Oilwellian]

35. I'm picturing CEOs rolling on a bed with...

money. :D

[AntiFascist]

29. I hope that Moore at least tries to get to the bottom of...

"the forbidden love, one that dare not speak its name". If this is just a broad-brushed attack on capitalism in general, then he misses the point.

[Toucano]

38. I thought "Hogs at the Trough" would have been a good title.

But I am still more agrarian oriented. Most of the audience is not.

[DesertRat]

46. That would have been a good title

:)

[scarletwoman]

55. I wanted the title to be "Jump! You fuckers!"

I suppose the "f" word would have been problematic, though...

;)

[DesertRat]

59. But it sure would get the Freepers all worked up!

;)

[PSzymeczek]

95. I think Arianna would have allowed Mike to use it. n/t

[Echo In Light]

48. Initially he claimed he was re-visiting 9/11, and was supposed to present a hard hitting film that..

...he said many people weren't going to like. Apparently he decided to put that on the back burner.

[fascisthunter]

65. awesome... can't wait to see it

I'll let as many people I know about this

[Mari333]

66. knr BOOYAH! for Michael Moore

[Bluenorthwest]

68. Moore is a great filmmaker

And those who expect a humor based activist to make dry, factual documentaries like they used to see in the 70's just miss the whole point. Moore is entertaining as well as educating in his films. Many people make a big fuss over pretending to see a cut made for humorous impact as being made to 'make a factual point'. That is just a pretense. It is very obvious when Mike is being funny and when he's telling the facts. Those who claim to miss those subtleties are saying far more about their abilities as a viewer than they are about the filmmaker.
Expecting a joke to be a footnoted factual item is crazy. And Moore's films are fact checked by his own people, and then by every right winger in the nation looking for a way to sue him. The 'lies' folks talk about are laughed out of court. They are like arguments that say "but your honor, we have found that the chicken did not cross the road to get to the other side."
He's far more anti-gun than I am, but I can still see when he's making for humor and when he's making for fact on the subject of guns. Anyone with a brain can see the difference.

[GinaMaria]

79. Moore revolutionized the documentary

He has a unique style and voice, expresses his humor and feelings but best of all he has brought people to documentaries that never would have seen one before. He's helped the genre in ways film makers were not able to in the past. Is he a provocateur? Some would say yes. The bottom line...Fun, entertaining, accessible and makes a point... all describe Moore's films.

And while I'm here... I highly recommend watching DVDs of his old TV shows.

[otohara]

69. this movie is going to be big

wall is is difficult to understand and Moore will put it in words everyone will be able to comprehend. I predict it will make more money than F911, Sicko, R&M.

[Just Saying]

72. Moore is to the documentary what Franken is to non-fiction

Funny, informative and interesting. They put the juice into dry material to make it more palitable to a larger audience. Now, I like some dry myself, but Moore, Franken and the like are a welcome break.

Looking forward to the new movie! MIKE ROCKS!

[grahamhgreen]

77. Awesome - MY hot date will LOVE this movie - no joke!!!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

80. Why doesn't Michael stand as a Dem candidate somewhere

he would scare the GOP

[PSzymeczek]

96. He prefers to be the gadfly. n/t

[anonymous171]

83. Sounds good. Can't wait. nt

[MissDeeds]

85. The last sentence says it all

We need more truth tellers like Michael Moore.

K&R :kick:

[lindisfarne]

90. Looking forward to it. n/t

[Just-plain-Kathy]

91. I support MM. ..K&R ...n/t

[scentopine]

92. Michael Moore is the real deal - a perfect foil for daily overdose of fluffy rhetoric

This is a guy who is passionate and has grown with his art. He is 100% populist hero. F911 was brilliant as was Bowling and Sicko.

I have had pleasure of talking to Michael Moore one on one at a small book store in Bellingham Wash years ago. He was patient, kind and generous with his small audience and entertained my idiotic small talk and that of others well past the time he should have left.

And he has learned to focus his anger and outrage in positive ways needed to make things right. He isn't "cool". He is not the popular kid in class. He is one of a kind and a true American spirit. If he wants to march on Wall Street or Washington, I'll be there.

Are his films perfect? No. Are they brilliant? Most are with every one setting a higher bar for the genre.

I read a review of "Food, Inc" and words like "agitprop" and "preachy" were used. So allow me to respond in the preferred vocabulary. "Hipper than thous" are the problem. God help anyone who makes a movie, and you watch it and feel just a built guilty or uncomfortable or annoyed at learning the truth that your individual behavior might be part of the problem. Too often these are democrats annoyed that they might have to make some small sacrifice or study a complex issue.

Michael - damn the hipsters, let it rip.

[Jefferson23]

94. Sicko was my favorite Moore documentary.

[glitch]

101. Cannot wait! perfect title, absolutely matches the emotionalism of the issue. nt

[Taverner]

103. Can't wait!

[troubledamerican]

110. Corporatism: A Gang-Bang Porno Rape Comedy

Should be the corrected title

[Vidar]

111. Another great one by Michael.

[MannyGoldstein]

118. Dear God - What A Stupid Fucking Idea

Now the bankers will demand another trillion or two of our tax money because their feelings were hurt by this movie.

Hey Michael - lay off the bankers, will you? It'll cost us a fortune.

[ConsAreLiars]

125. Wow, I was hoping he'd go there before much longer.

This subject has been the underlying reality of every documentary since Roger and Me, and I really look forward to seeing how he handles the challenge of helping people see past the nearly universal deceptions and diversions that 99% of the KKKorporate media blast out constantly.

(edit typo)