TulipO Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 This movie was fucking great. Yeah, he was a little to lovey dovey on FDR for my taste, and he largely avoided the term socialism so as not to "freak out" wider audiences (IMO) but ultimately a great call to action. I'll probably go see it again soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archangel Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 yea awesome. so...how much money has this movie grossed so far? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 no idea. as a heads-up, all the DVD screeners (so far) seem fake. just uh, for research purposes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archangel Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 just curious about all the profit being made, is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drifter Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Well, Moore has even said it. As long as people go to his movies, he'll have enough money to make more... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 God damn it, I hope it's better than Canadian Bacon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TulipO Posted October 21, 2009 Author Share Posted October 21, 2009 Well, I don't think Michale Moores' earnings are depriving people of anything, frankly. If you can prove that arch, I'll listen. You still haven't proven that you have read the Communist Manifesto, nor have you backed up the statement that you made concerning Marx supposedly saying that socialism is a pipe dream, so I expect to wait a while. Take your time. Also, what an interesting thing to say. I mean, by implying that the film is selling a lot of tickets, are you implying that capitalism may be....unpopular right now? Just sayin... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Jax Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 I had the same experience with this movie was with F 9/11 and Sicko, which is to say they have all kind of bored me. Since I keep myself relatively informed, I know most of the facts he presents. I know how much productivity has gone up relative to wages in the past thirty years, I know how much the top tax rate was from the 40's through the 70's. I know about dead peasant insurance. I know all this. The personal stories are still touching, but they haven't really unnerved me the way Bowling for Columbine did when I first saw it. Still, the zeitgeist in this country has been so radically shifted to the right of the political spectrum, I applaud anything that tries to move it back to a healthier place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archangel Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 the movie was total BS, but that's not unexpected considering the source. That being said, it's the pinnacle of hypocrisy to be lambasting a system from which you profit so greatly. If he were in any way sincere, he'd give away his 'profits' to the people who help make his movies. After all: they're the real workers, are they not? He's just a nasty bourgeois taskmaster. and yes, I have read the Manifesto. And yes, Marx did say his ideas would never work. But that's ok, fallacious arguments where always your ace, so keep it up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TulipO Posted October 21, 2009 Author Share Posted October 21, 2009 AGAIN: Citation REQUIRED. Where, in which work of Marx did he state that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archangel Posted October 24, 2009 Share Posted October 24, 2009 we covered it once in a political theory class. I no longer have access to the writing, but it's from 'Marx, Marxism and Utopia'. That's my source, though I can no longer site you the exact phrase since, again, I no longer have access to it. I strongly urge you to read it, though. It was a good read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alive she cried Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 they haven't really unnerved me the way Bowling for Columbine did when I first saw it. Yeah that happened to me to, but then I discovered the actual truth which unnerved me further. That this lying, gigantic bag of shit has so many fans and makes so much money from his visual diarrhoea. The world would be a lot better if he was dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 The personal stories are still touching, but they haven't really unnerved me the way Bowling for Columbine did when I first saw it. What was unnerving about Bowling For Columbine? That Canada has happier news? That Target sells bullets for cheap? That Charlton Hesston had alzheimers? Or that the Oklahoma City bomber's brother is just as insane? Not even taking into account all the half-truths, cheap scares, and things that had nothing to do with the point he was trying to make and with all seriousness, of the actual point of the movie (which was about violence in our culture, not guns) what was unnerving? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 Moore had some solid bits in that one. it was all over the place (hence baytor's examples and the distortions inciting ASC's ire) but - and i cant quite put my finger on the exact scenes at the moment - there were bits that were like intros to Chomsky's "Manufacturing Consent", which takes the notion of the "culture of fear" a step further into what this allows one's gov't to do (and not do). Chomsky's shit, even when presented via DVD, isnt nearly as approachable (this is what dry intellectuals usually give you; monotone lectures from a podium vs Moore's presentation which i think most can at least agree on is entertaining). its not the big eye-opener i had from said text, but it hints at a spark, if you look around all the emotionally-manipulative stuff (which still wasnt as bad as it was in the 3rd act of F 9-11). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iambaytor Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 He did have solid bits but he was too busy harassing the NRA, Target, and Charlton Heston and trying to scare the fuck out of his audience to bring them to the surface. A lot of people walked out of that movie thinking "yeah, guns are the problem" and even Moore wasn't trying to say that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The NZA Posted October 25, 2009 Share Posted October 25, 2009 heh, i remember one neo-con review that went "ima talk about being a lifetime NRA member and loving guns for ten minutes so's i can talk about how shitty they are for another few hours". yeah, i see what you're saying...i didnt think that was his point either, but he didnt spend nearly as long at the (former) munitions developing station or trying to establish the link between our violent international behavior and what he was going for as, say, what youre pointing to with target, heston etc, so i can see where people walked away thinking it was straight anti-gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.