Fahrenheit 11/9 (Michael Moore, 2018)
- MoonlitKnight
- Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 10:44 pm
Re: Fahrenheit 11/9 (Michael Moore, 2017)
I've always regarded Moore as more of an 'op-ed' filmmaker than a documentarian. And I feel he's one of the few prominent figures who's advocated moving the country at least somewhat back to the Left as it's increasingly moved to the Right over the last 30+ years. That said, I could force myself to see his last feature, "Trumpland." Sorry, but Hillary Clinton was the epitome of the Establishment that sucks from the same corporate teat as the Republicans, and, thus, would not have been that much of a significant improvement over Trump.
- tenia
- Ask Me About My Bassoon
- Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am
Re: Fahrenheit 11/9 (Michael Moore, 2017)
I highly doubt this.MoonlitKnight wrote:would not have been that much of a significant improvement over Trump.
And I mean, the current discussions around Trump should be enough to support this doubt.
- DarkImbecile
- Ask me about my visible cat breasts
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:24 pm
- Location: Albuquerque, NM
Re: Fahrenheit 11/9 (Michael Moore, 2017)
I don't like McDonald's cheeseburgers, but I can differentiate between one of those and a shit sandwich.
- hearthesilence
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
- Location: NYC
Re: Fahrenheit 11/9 (Michael Moore, 2017)
That's a ridiculous statement to make in light of what he's done and trying to do to the environment, civil rights, education, the LGBT community, the poor and those needing healthcare. I can't imagine anyone rightfully believing it wouldn't make a difference to them unless they're shielded from all of these policy changes.
- tenia
- Ask Me About My Bassoon
- Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am
Re: Fahrenheit 11/9 (Michael Moore, 2017)
Or it's just another Internet hyperbole.
- domino harvey
- Dot Com Dom
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
Re: Fahrenheit 11/9 (Michael Moore, 2017)
Plenty of that to go around already in this thread
- who is bobby dylan
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:50 am
Re: Fahrenheit 11/9 (Michael Moore, 2017)
The general movement to the right started closer to fifty years ago, not thirty. During the same time many specific things like rights for women, African Americans, and LGBTQ etc. have improved (i.e.) moved to the left. So the picture is more complicated than you paint. Also, from a Leftist perspective, Clinton would clearly be a significant improvement over Trump. To list just three examples. She would have moved the median vote on the Supreme Court to the left for the first time in decades, she would be expanding the number of people who have access to healthcare (not actively trying to decrease it, while also making that healthcare worse) and she would be expanding the social safety net through paid medical leave and childcare, not cutting government programs, to pay for tax cuts that add trillions to the debt, that will make it harder to create new programs in the future. One doesn't have to like Clinton personally to be willing to admit these things.MoonlitKnight wrote:I've always regarded Moore as more of an 'op-ed' filmmaker than a documentarian. And I feel he's one of the few prominent figures who's advocated moving the country at least somewhat back to the Left as it's increasingly moved to the Right over the last 30+ years. That said, I could force myself to see his last feature, "Trumpland." Sorry, but Hillary Clinton was the epitome of the Establishment that sucks from the same corporate teat as the Republicans, and, thus, would not have been that much of a significant improvement over Trump.
As for Moore. I think his films suffer from the fact that he's basically a person who sees the injustice clearly and assumes that because the injustice is clear the analysis/solution must be clear as well. He doesn't have a good understanding of US politics and/or history (based on my familiarity with his films and political actions) so his films, while impassioned with genuine outrage and urgency are intellectually very scattershot, the last film of his I saw, Capitalism: A Love Story suffered greatly from this. Unlike a genuine expert he doesn't appear to know much more about his subjects than his audience and so his films feel like someone cobbling together half remembered facts, hoping it all adds up to something, rather than someone laying out a cohesive, detailed case.
- hearthesilence
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
- Location: NYC
Re: Fahrenheit 11/9 (Michael Moore, 2017)
Losing the Supreme Court pick alone is enormous - replacing Scalia with a far less conservative justice would have made an enormous shift in the Supreme Court, and that is not hyperbole.
-
- Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 11:32 am
Re: Fahrenheit 11/9 (Michael Moore, 2017)
That's based on the assumption that he is a film maker. However, he is just more of a political activist that would use any medium to serve his message. He is aware that it is one perspective, he is also aware that the information is not new.who is bobby dylan wrote:MoonlitKnight wrote:As for Moore. I think his films suffer from the fact that he's basically a person who sees the injustice clearly and assumes that because the injustice is clear the analysis/solution must be clear as well. He doesn't have a good understanding of US politics and/or history (based on my familiarity with his films and political actions) so his films, while impassioned with genuine outrage and urgency are intellectually very scattershot, the last film of his I saw, Capitalism: A Love Story suffered greatly from this. Unlike a genuine expert he doesn't appear to know much more about his subjects than his audience and so his films feel like someone cobbling together half remembered facts, hoping it all adds up to something, rather than someone laying out a cohesive, detailed case.
Moore is exercising his personal voice in the most powerful way he can, to shout about issues he is passionate about, he is not creating documentary for balanced, historical canon. It's more close to a sophisticated, elaborate form of tagging/skywriting/op-ed/political marketing savvy than traditional film. That's why the criticism doesn't hit the target.
- mfunk9786
- Under Chris' Protection
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
- Location: Philadelphia, PA
Re: Fahrenheit 11/9 (Michael Moore, 2017)
I realize the line is blurred because of the work that Moore does, but reminder that we have a politics thread and if you want to discuss the 2016 election and the Supreme Court and how good or bad Hillary Clinton is/was, that's still the place to do it if it isn't within the context of this film.
- knives
- Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm
Re: Fahrenheit 11/9 (Michael Moore, 2017)
Well that's just silly, and not just because he has made a fictional film. He makes films this he is a film maker whether you like it or not. You can be a political activist and a filmmaker. They are not exclusive terms especially when they are tied so close together. That's like saying Updike isn't a novelist.calculus entrophy wrote:That's based on the assumption that he is a film maker. However, he is just more of a political activist that would use any medium to serve his message. He is aware that it is one perspective, he is also aware that the information is not new.who is bobby dylan wrote:MoonlitKnight wrote:As for Moore. I think his films suffer from the fact that he's basically a person who sees the injustice clearly and assumes that because the injustice is clear the analysis/solution must be clear as well. He doesn't have a good understanding of US politics and/or history (based on my familiarity with his films and political actions) so his films, while impassioned with genuine outrage and urgency are intellectually very scattershot, the last film of his I saw, Capitalism: A Love Story suffered greatly from this. Unlike a genuine expert he doesn't appear to know much more about his subjects than his audience and so his films feel like someone cobbling together half remembered facts, hoping it all adds up to something, rather than someone laying out a cohesive, detailed case.
Moore is exercising his personal voice in the most powerful way he can, to shout about issues he is passionate about, he is not creating documentary for balanced, historical canon. It's more close to a sophisticated, elaborate form of tagging/skywriting/op-ed/political marketing savvy than traditional film. That's why the criticism doesn't hit the target.
-
- Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2014 11:32 am
Re: Fahrenheit 11/9 (Michael Moore, 2017)
I'm not hearing anything other than a pedantic rebuttal, which I, too find "silly". The straw man you outlined of this vs that, is not what I said.knives wrote:Well that's just silly, and not just because he has made a fictional film. He makes films this he is a film maker whether you like it or not. You can be a political activist and a filmmaker. They are not exclusive terms especially when they are tied so close together. That's like saying Updike isn't a novelist.
I get that a film is being made, but if you don't understand that his objective first and foremost is to communicate his bias, and repeat commonly available information, then to criticize him for doing this is not to understand his purpose. I was responding to those that posted those comments, and would rather let my original response stand than argue this further.
- domino harvey
- Dot Com Dom
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
Re: Fahrenheit 11/9 (Michael Moore, 2017)
We'll open this thread when the film is shown and people can talk about it and not whatever the hell is happening here
- Apperson
- Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2016 3:47 pm
- Location: Oxfordshire, UK
- mfunk9786
- Under Chris' Protection
- Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
- Location: Philadelphia, PA
Re: Fahrenheit 11/9 (Michael Moore, 2017)
Wellp, Drumpf is finished now
Also, guys, this is unlocked ad infinitum. If we can have a Death of a Nation thread going we damn well can have a Fahrenheit 11/9 thread going. Don't be a jerk and this will go just fine.
Also, guys, this is unlocked ad infinitum. If we can have a Death of a Nation thread going we damn well can have a Fahrenheit 11/9 thread going. Don't be a jerk and this will go just fine.
- flyonthewall2983
- Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:31 pm
- Location: Indiana
- Contact:
- Big Ben
- Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:54 pm
- Location: Great Falls, Montana
Re: Fahrenheit 11/9 (Michael Moore, 2018)
I mean what more can he say that we don't already know?
- Altair
- Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2013 12:56 pm
- Location: England
Re: Fahrenheit 11/9 (Michael Moore, 2018)
Pretty sure the interns were in charge of the office when they were putting that poster together.
- domino harvey
- Dot Com Dom
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm
-
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 4:57 am
- Location: East Coast, USA
Re: Fahrenheit 11/9 (Michael Moore, 2018)
Well, that's just terrible. I was looking forward to seeing Fahrenheit 11/9, but if these accusations of Moore not paying his bills and stiffing a fine company like Boston Light and Sound (who were instrumental in bringing the 70mm roadshow of The Hateful Eight to many theaters outside of the big cities, including my local AMC, where I was able to see it three times) are true, then I'll be happy to not see it or any more of his movies until he settles his debts. Usually this isn't something I would really care about, but Moore's "man of the people" persona makes it extra shitty.
- The Elegant Dandy Fop
- Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 3:25 am
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
Re: Fahrenheit 11/9 (Michael Moore, 2018)
Through my own film exhibition needs, I've dealt with Boston Light and Magic for simple things such as loops for focusing and calibrating aspect ratios on projectors. Not only are they diligent, but have incredible customer service even for small orders of $100. I have nothing but nice things to say about them. What a shame he'd complain about one of the best in a field in a world where projection is getting sloppier and messier.
- furbicide
- Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2011 4:52 am
Re: Fahrenheit 11/9 (Michael Moore, 2018)
I thought you were talking about the trailer there for a moment, in which case I would have heartily agreed with you. What's the point of this documentary? Moore's no Adam Curtis (or even moderately talented columnist) in terms of narrative or analysis, the subject has been done to death every single day in this exhausting 24/7 media landscape, and he's unlikely to have landed any earth-shattering interviews, so all that's left to look forward to here is the stunts – which is what, hosing a small section of the Michigan governor's driveway!?! Really high-stakes stuff there, Mike.
- Omensetter
- Yes We Cannes
- Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2011 8:17 pm
- Location: Lawrence, KS, U.S.
Re: Fahrenheit 11/9 (Michael Moore, 2018)
Perhaps I was influenced by watching this with a long-time moderate Democrat family member that is now, it seems, an incipient leftist, but this film is basically fine and effective.
Moore starts the film stumbling, offering untethered comments on Trump before introducing a thesis purporting that his film will be about how the U.S. arrived at Trump before discarding it within minutes by pivoting to Rick Snyder and Flint, occasionally paying lip service to his thesis like so many an undergrad paper written hours before its due date. Basically, he had a catchy title and great footage, and wanted to do something with it. What follows is basically a series of mini-movies mainly related to 2018, effectively edited into entertainment. It's not a good documentary per se, but effective and justifiable, especially given Moore's reach (I cannot think of any other film to open wide that cogently issues fulminations against Barack Obama).
The film is at its best when it spirals off of two historians, Ruth Ben-Ghiat and Timothy Snyder, who provide necessary context (never a strength of Moore's) to Trump's fascism. In terms of argumentation, though, it's near-incoherent beyond "take action while there's still time," but there is still enough to certainly offer a commendation.
Above all, though, this film really just reminded of what a long fucking year it's been.
Moore starts the film stumbling, offering untethered comments on Trump before introducing a thesis purporting that his film will be about how the U.S. arrived at Trump before discarding it within minutes by pivoting to Rick Snyder and Flint, occasionally paying lip service to his thesis like so many an undergrad paper written hours before its due date. Basically, he had a catchy title and great footage, and wanted to do something with it. What follows is basically a series of mini-movies mainly related to 2018, effectively edited into entertainment. It's not a good documentary per se, but effective and justifiable, especially given Moore's reach (I cannot think of any other film to open wide that cogently issues fulminations against Barack Obama).
The film is at its best when it spirals off of two historians, Ruth Ben-Ghiat and Timothy Snyder, who provide necessary context (never a strength of Moore's) to Trump's fascism. In terms of argumentation, though, it's near-incoherent beyond "take action while there's still time," but there is still enough to certainly offer a commendation.
Above all, though, this film really just reminded of what a long fucking year it's been.