3000, RE: You seem to have missed the point...|
Posted by signified, Thu Nov-13-03 12:17 PM
>The reason Moore doesn't make these tight connections that
>you seem to desire is because it's not possible, and the
>film admits that. The issue is more complex than simply
>blaming it on Cause A or Cause B. The whole purpose of the
>film is to ask questions, not answer them. I think Moore
>does a great job of posing possible answers, but leaves the
>viewer to make up their own mind.
First of all it is possible to provide some coherence to the events and to relate the geopolitical implications of US policy upon the mindstate of fearful individuals. All the film admits is that it is *incapable* of providing that coherence to the argument. What, just because the film told you so you thought it was true? Secondly, nobody thus far (myself included) has referenced the idea that the issues dealt with are understandable in absolute immutable terms. The A/B analogy is a bit ridiculous seeing as how I have been arguing for a greater complexity and depth to Moores thesis this entire time. The kind of depth that addresses a complex interrelation of trends (foreign/domestic, economic/social, and geographic) leading to the current situation in America. Moore doesnt attempt this, or even attempt a simple crystallization for the viewers to digest, he just throws his flabby arms up into the air and concedes defeat. He is a coward for that reason - for not even attempting a complex understanding in the first place.
>Also, your critiques on the film making are just poorly
>constructed. I watched the film again today, and noticed not
>only good voiceovers, but perfectly timed editing. On top of
My critiques are apt. Each and every one of them. You enjoy the nasal monotone delivery of Moore's voiceovers? The man's voice isn't fit for a cable access show, and his choice of reading the voiceovers was clearly a vanity play. Still awful no matter how you flip it. And perfectly timed editing? Is that the litmus test for a good documentary film? Perfectly timed editing is the LEAST I expect from any production. Its how it was edited, spliced with cheery 50's vomitus and Moore wheezing nasally, and how the piece presented its ideas through the editing. All of it was trash.
If there is any reason for the film getting acclaim it is simply because people are SETTLING for Moore because of a nicely timed historical co-incidence. Nobody in their right mind would consider this film worthy above its historically contingent political context.
>Finally, in regards to the portrayal of Canada, please
>explain to me what was such a farce. I didn't think it was
>that far off. I'm interested to hear this.
Do you live in Canada? The portrayal of Canada was a farce for a number of reasons. Firstly because of the locations that Moore choose. Sarnia - a city in the boonies with a low crime rate, which seems to suit Moores thesis about Canada well even if it is completely fallacious. Then Windsor, also a low-key urban metropolis in Canada. Its handy for him to use Windsor as an example because its right across from Detroit so it gives the impression that the mean differences are not geographically but culturally defined. They're not, especially to the extent that Moore says they are. Lastly, and most importantly, he goes to Toronto because Toronto is a big Canadian city with the highest crime rate. BUT - and this is crucial to how Moore manipulates his version of the truth to suit his hypothesis on Canada - he goes to a bougie neighborhood to knock on peoples doors, probably the Annex, or the Esplanade, which doesnt speak for the majority of Torontonians in terms of the locking door issue. Secondly, he interviews people in middle-upper class neighborhoods with little racial diversity, in order to suit his thesis. He visited a 'ghetto' - didn't cite the name, it looks like some place on Finch in the north end of the city, but he DIDNT go knocking on doors there or interview people there.
Apart from the upper class neighborhoods people in Toronto generally do lock their doors, do take steps to protect their own safety, and also do commit violent acts against one another (a highschool gangwar just killed 1 17yearold teenager here after he was stabbed in the gut admist a throng of people carrying bats and chains and other weapons). It happened, funnily enough, near the 'ghetto' which Moore placidly strolls through at 2pm in the afternoon.
Moore's presentation of Canada is propagandistic and false.