IMDb रेटिंग
7.5/10
28 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंAfter General Motors closes its factory in Flint, Michigan, eliminating 35,000 jobs, filmmaker Michael Moore undertakes a quixotic quest to interview General Motors' chairman, Roger B. Smith... सभी पढ़ेंAfter General Motors closes its factory in Flint, Michigan, eliminating 35,000 jobs, filmmaker Michael Moore undertakes a quixotic quest to interview General Motors' chairman, Roger B. Smith.After General Motors closes its factory in Flint, Michigan, eliminating 35,000 jobs, filmmaker Michael Moore undertakes a quixotic quest to interview General Motors' chairman, Roger B. Smith.
- पुरस्कार
- कुल 14 जीत
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
I still prefer "Bowling for Columbine" because it has a wider spectrum, but "Roger and Me" has also it´s great moments.
The most here write it´s a movie about GM. Well thats true, but it´s much more a movie about the people who worked for GM. Many here also think GM has the right to close it factories where and as much it wants. They see just GM gave the people in Flint work, they don´t see that the people of Flint also made it possible for GM to become that what it is. And, don´t tell me you need to close everything to survive! I bet if they closed the half or lowered the payments it had the same effect!
The most here write it´s a movie about GM. Well thats true, but it´s much more a movie about the people who worked for GM. Many here also think GM has the right to close it factories where and as much it wants. They see just GM gave the people in Flint work, they don´t see that the people of Flint also made it possible for GM to become that what it is. And, don´t tell me you need to close everything to survive! I bet if they closed the half or lowered the payments it had the same effect!
This movie really showed me what America's free enterprise system is about. Make your millions in producing automobiles in an American town, then run to Mexico where labor is cheap, and not offer any jobs to Americans. I loved it, very true, very deep.
I loved how Roger Smith dodged the film crews everytime they showed up. It was very good to show the effects of the plant closing shop. I never expected a true look into what happends to American workers.
I give this one 5 stars, and I realize now that our Free Enterprise System just keeps the poor, poor. And the wealthy get even more wealth. Our free enterprise system is a joke.
I loved how Roger Smith dodged the film crews everytime they showed up. It was very good to show the effects of the plant closing shop. I never expected a true look into what happends to American workers.
I give this one 5 stars, and I realize now that our Free Enterprise System just keeps the poor, poor. And the wealthy get even more wealth. Our free enterprise system is a joke.
I grew up near Decatur, Il, a city that was devastated in the late 70's and 80's by downsizing in the auto industry, the migration of jobs south of the border, and corruption in the giants of agribusiness. The city's economy has never really recovered and has been on the frontlines of the labor battles of this country, while the national media has ignored it. It bears a close parallel to Flint, Michigan, as depicted in "Roger & Me.
Moore goes back to his hometown and sees the effects of massive job loss, created by a company that cared more about executive stock options and bonuses, than the community it lived in. We meet people who have lost their jobs, benefits, and homes as a result of short-sighted decisions. With few alternatives that pay a living wage, the community spirals into decline. We see the arrogance of wealth, via lavish parties, while the poor are evicted from their homes. We watch as city leaders concoct one bizarre cosmetic scheme after another, without ever addressing the real roots of the economic problems of the city.
The film makes many valid points which still hold true and still occur. You can find fault with Moore's "ambush" approach and mockery of celebrities; but, Moore has usually made civil efforts to talk with these individuals, only to be ignored or driven off. So, he resorts to grandstanding tactics which brings attention to the issues he is pursuing. Also, the celebrities are so generally caught up in their own self importance, that they deserve the skewering they receive.
You can fault Moore's tactics and selective portrayal of an issue, but he does provoke discussion, which is usually his aim. In this, he is following the great tradition of the muckrakers, like Upton Sinclair, who were able to stimulate argument on vital topics and effect positive change. Moore is a great filmmaker and thought-provoking figure. Love him or hate him, he makes you focus on issues. Too bad politicians and executives don't.
Moore goes back to his hometown and sees the effects of massive job loss, created by a company that cared more about executive stock options and bonuses, than the community it lived in. We meet people who have lost their jobs, benefits, and homes as a result of short-sighted decisions. With few alternatives that pay a living wage, the community spirals into decline. We see the arrogance of wealth, via lavish parties, while the poor are evicted from their homes. We watch as city leaders concoct one bizarre cosmetic scheme after another, without ever addressing the real roots of the economic problems of the city.
The film makes many valid points which still hold true and still occur. You can find fault with Moore's "ambush" approach and mockery of celebrities; but, Moore has usually made civil efforts to talk with these individuals, only to be ignored or driven off. So, he resorts to grandstanding tactics which brings attention to the issues he is pursuing. Also, the celebrities are so generally caught up in their own self importance, that they deserve the skewering they receive.
You can fault Moore's tactics and selective portrayal of an issue, but he does provoke discussion, which is usually his aim. In this, he is following the great tradition of the muckrakers, like Upton Sinclair, who were able to stimulate argument on vital topics and effect positive change. Moore is a great filmmaker and thought-provoking figure. Love him or hate him, he makes you focus on issues. Too bad politicians and executives don't.
...Michael Moore should have stuck to the facts. I lived in the Detroit area (Milford, the home of the GM Proving Grounds) from the early 70's until 2002. The 80's were a rough decade for the auto industry.
Roger Smith became Chairman and CEO of GM in January, 1981. The man was an unmitigated disaster. Among some of the things he proposed was the elimination of GM's engineering division (pink slipping everyone). He didn't think that the world's largest automaker needed an in-house engineering capability. Absolutely moronic!
There were several other examples of Roger Smith's buffoonery. The viewing audience would have been better served had Mr. Moore stuck to the facts. There were several items in this film that were either staged or flat-out false (people who never worked for GM getting evicted, Pres. Reagan being quoted out of context, etc.). This is the typical tactic Mr. Moore uses in all his films.
The upshot? Mr. Moore is a gifted filmmaker and able storyteller. Unfortunately, he doesn't let the facts get in the way of the point he's trying to make. There was no shortage of material on what a moron Roger Smith was (is?). Had Mr. Moore kept with the facts, Roger & Me would not just be entertaining, it would have the added benefit of being factual.
Roger Smith became Chairman and CEO of GM in January, 1981. The man was an unmitigated disaster. Among some of the things he proposed was the elimination of GM's engineering division (pink slipping everyone). He didn't think that the world's largest automaker needed an in-house engineering capability. Absolutely moronic!
There were several other examples of Roger Smith's buffoonery. The viewing audience would have been better served had Mr. Moore stuck to the facts. There were several items in this film that were either staged or flat-out false (people who never worked for GM getting evicted, Pres. Reagan being quoted out of context, etc.). This is the typical tactic Mr. Moore uses in all his films.
The upshot? Mr. Moore is a gifted filmmaker and able storyteller. Unfortunately, he doesn't let the facts get in the way of the point he's trying to make. There was no shortage of material on what a moron Roger Smith was (is?). Had Mr. Moore kept with the facts, Roger & Me would not just be entertaining, it would have the added benefit of being factual.
Michael Moore is making a key point with this movie that, judging from other people's reviews, seems easy to miss. The point isn't that the people of Flint expected GM to care for them "from cradle to grave," as one reviewer put it. The point was that the working people of Flint, despite doing everything they were supposed to do, despite keeping up their end of the bargain, were destroyed by a corporation that FELT NO OBLIGATION TO EVEN EXPLAIN WHY. That's the symbolism of the attempt to interview Roger Smith and Smith's unwillingness to answer questions.
In a corporation like GM, there is no one really accountable for what the corporation does at the end of the day. The stockholders hide behind the CEO. The CEO hides behind the board of directors. The directors cite "the stockholders' will." The PR men blame "market forces" (which is a code word for greed). The union bosses double talk. And in the end, they all dump squarely on the working stiff, who always comes last in the considerations of management.
This film is NOT supposed to be a documentary. It's the facts of the situation as seen by a kid who grew up in Flint among GM workers. He feels betrayed, he feels depressed and he feels angry. That's why the film is "manipulative." It's HIS opinion! And even if it IS his opinion, that doesn't excuse the disgusting behavior of all the rich cretins and politicians in this film. Didn't they KNOW that they were on camera?! As I watched, I wondered if America is really as full of snotty, middle-management punks as this film seems to show. And why do corporate androids get so rude when a camera is around? Are they really so terrified of someone exposing them for what they are? Sheesh!
By the way: when GM closed down the Flint plants from 1987-1989, they were making one BILLION dollars in profits per year. They took jobs from Americans and gave them to foreigners despite a nice profit margin. Isn't that treason?
A good film. A-.
Some things to watch for: Sleazy Jeri-Curl eviction man, one snotty PR person after another, Michael Moore's fashion sense, Ronald Reagan looking really dumb and confused, Bob Eubanks' sense of humor, Miss Michigan's off-the-cuff brilliance, rabbit meat.
In a corporation like GM, there is no one really accountable for what the corporation does at the end of the day. The stockholders hide behind the CEO. The CEO hides behind the board of directors. The directors cite "the stockholders' will." The PR men blame "market forces" (which is a code word for greed). The union bosses double talk. And in the end, they all dump squarely on the working stiff, who always comes last in the considerations of management.
This film is NOT supposed to be a documentary. It's the facts of the situation as seen by a kid who grew up in Flint among GM workers. He feels betrayed, he feels depressed and he feels angry. That's why the film is "manipulative." It's HIS opinion! And even if it IS his opinion, that doesn't excuse the disgusting behavior of all the rich cretins and politicians in this film. Didn't they KNOW that they were on camera?! As I watched, I wondered if America is really as full of snotty, middle-management punks as this film seems to show. And why do corporate androids get so rude when a camera is around? Are they really so terrified of someone exposing them for what they are? Sheesh!
By the way: when GM closed down the Flint plants from 1987-1989, they were making one BILLION dollars in profits per year. They took jobs from Americans and gave them to foreigners despite a nice profit margin. Isn't that treason?
A good film. A-.
Some things to watch for: Sleazy Jeri-Curl eviction man, one snotty PR person after another, Michael Moore's fashion sense, Ronald Reagan looking really dumb and confused, Bob Eubanks' sense of humor, Miss Michigan's off-the-cuff brilliance, rabbit meat.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाMoore was collecting $98 per week on welfare at the time of this production shoot.
- भाव
[In closing credits]
subtitles: This film cannot be shown within the city of Flint... All the movie theaters have closed.
- क्रेज़ी क्रेडिटThis film cannot be shown within the city of Flint. All the movie theatres have closed.
- कनेक्शनEdited from Design for Dreaming (1956)
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is Roger & Me?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- आधिकारिक साइटें
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- A Humorous Look at How General Motors Destroyed Flint, Michigan
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $1,60,000(अनुमानित)
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $67,06,368
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $80,253
- 25 दिस॰ 1989
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $77,06,368
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें