Michael Moore Hates America

I always knew Michael Moore distorted things, but it never really bothered me. I like Bowling For Columbine, despite the gimmicks and misrepresentation that goes on in it. Those films (while not "documentaries) are a sort of "stand up" journalism and it was entertaining at least. F/11 was an inappropriate forum for Moore's style, went too far and was simply tasteless. That said, I don't hate Michael Moore, I sort of pity him. Anyway... I was reluctant to see this movie mainly and shallowly because of the title, but it was actually pretty good. There were a couple sophomoric parts I disagreed with, but the guy who made it (Mike Wilson) seems like a genuine guy, and is not mean spirited at all. The movie is not really about Moore, but rather what America means to Wilson. He is a very simple person with simple views - not stupid, but simple. The parts that involve Michael Moore are essentially about his approach to documentary making, and what objectivity means - especially if one is pursuing it. It's worth a watch - don't get freaked out by the title. Wilson explains the title is more a comment on the shrillness of political discourse in America right now. (I would have gone with a different title still.) All in all go rent it.

Okay, I haven't seen this movie but I have read and talked to people who have... and I just have this to say about the rating it has received on IMDb:

Don't rate it as a 10 or a 1... it makes no difference. IMDb calculates votes on a weighted system and most likely, on such a 'political' film, they will disregard the votes from users that display a history of voting tens or ones on certain other titles similar to this one.

Just watch the film and give it your honest rating... odds are it isn't one of the greatest films ever made in the history of mankind (10), nor is it the lowest turd ever to stink up the silver screen (1), GIVE IT AN HONEST VOTE AND STOP THINKING YOU CAN BULLY THE SYSTEM. I've seen it with The Godfather and LOTR and Shawshank people too and it's ridiculous. Seriously, if you are incapable of viewing a film outside of your own impassioned feeling-of-righteousness over it, then you have no business even venturing to rate it on IMDb. The rating it receives here is also not the be-all end-all of the film's worth, and thinking that you are accomplishing a great deal by voting for it to such an extreme is idiocy.

Alright that's my rant... give this film a chance. I'm a Bush-fan and I gave Fahrenheit my honest rating as a film, not according to how much I disagreed with its ideals.

Michael Wilson has a thesis and pretends he doesn't. The thesis is in the title. He sets out to prove it, locating people happy to get attention slamming Moore like Maysles and puts out the film just in time to cash in on the release of Sicko. Wilson figures his own deceptive practices can be excused by admitting them, but when you're out to slam someone else for doing the same thing, one should practice what one preaches. Moore should have granted the interview; the film would then have lasted about 10 minutes. There's nothing unique here that hasn't been done to death on numerous "Moore-watching" boards or the earlier film "Fahrenhype 911". This is about someone making a name for himself off Moore's career.

It's helpful that the film again reminds Moore to be more careful about errors and improve. But the film is not a work of note, just a work feeding off the creativity of others, namely that of Fahrenhype 911 and Moore. Wilson puts the spotlight on himself by showing us his family photos at the beginning and portraying himself as intrepid reporter on the beat throughout while complaining that Moore is making films about himself.

I have to say that I am not a fan of Michael Moore. He makes very entertaining films, he has a good sense of humor, but it is an insult to call him a true documentary filmmaker. His films are really propaganda pieces to promote him as a working class hero. He makes himself the story. This film is by Michael Wilson, a guy who wanted to give Moore a taste of his own medicine. This documentary follows Wilson's attempts to interview Moore, a la Moore's own film Roger and Me. He is avoided by Moore at every turn, at one point he attends a speech by Moore, and in an open question session tells Moore the title of his film, and Moore shouts him down. It is a tactic that Moore uses, but when Wilson puts him on the spot he lashes out. It is ironic that a man who has become a multi millionaire by confronting people hates when it is done to him. It was great to see Wilson interview Moore supporters after the incident, and disagree with the way Moore had treated him. They were Moore supporters but had no problem with someone that disagreed with them.

To be fair, Wilson borrows a lot from Moore's style, the film is very much like Moore's own work. The difference is the tone, it is obvious that Wilson is not a Moore fan, he views America with a more positive perspective, for some people that would mean that Wilson is some right wing nut. He makes no real political proclamations, his point is that we should be able to debate without being so shrill. Both sides have bomb throwers, Moore is really just that, a bomb thrower that wants to wallow in how bad it is in America without offering any solutions. The right has Ann Coulter, she is just as bad as Moore. This film is not scandalous or inflammatory in any way, it does point out that Moore has every right to say what he has to say, but it exposes how he slickly puts his films together to get his messages across. He seems to be a very savvy and cynical filmmaker. Michal Wilson chooses to view his country in a hopeful light, Moore sees it in a bad way. Does "Michael Moore Hate America"?, as the titles says, I don't know, but this film makes a pretty good argument. But what this film does is that it champions his right to think and say what he wants, and that is the way it should be.

Grade: B

In response to Frank Harrison's last posting, I would like to say that it is ultimately the public's decision who they want to believe.

Why are liberals so afraid of movies like MMHA? If Michael Moore wants to make movies laced with conspiracy theories and other unproven allegations, then people have the right to listen to the other side, am I right?

I've seen Fahrenheit 9/11 and I absolutely despised it. I think it is shameful of Moore to be working with foreign distributors to show his film in other countries. I don't mind that he is making millions of dollars, thats the American way, but if he is truly interested in making America better, he should show the movie only in the United States. There is no reason to show the movie outside the U.S. except for the fact that Moore and his cohorts want to make more money. Moore even takes great pride in listing all of the countries that are playing his movie right on his own website!

With that said, I still think the public (the U.S. public only) should see Moore's movie. I also think that those same people should also see MMHA. The people can then decide for themselves what to believe. If liberals truly want people to be free and open-minded, then they have to be willing to say that both Moore's film and Wilson's film are valuable to opening the public's eyes.

By the way, it sounds like Harrison has not even seen MMHA, yet he claims that it is 'shrill'. Was Moore's movie not shrill? When I came out of Moore's movie, the first thing that popped into my mind was that "at least we know freedom of speech isn't dead." Moore was allowed to say anything that he wanted, whether it was true or not, about Bush and his administration. To the liberals, the ends justifies the means, which is to remove Bush from office. Yet these same liberals do not want a movie like MMHA to be seen because it may expose the fraud that Michael Moore is.

I like how the liberals deal with dissent.