Have you seen it? omg!
well worth a watch, i’ll tell you.
yeah saw it a long time ago. Although very interesting, michael moores docos are so completley biased that its impossible to take him seriously.
He points out flaws as if there is some magic solution. He never covers the other side of the story. He is a bad ‘reporter’, and i reckon everything he ‘reports’ should be taken with a grain of salt
I haven’t seen the Moore film - but after being scooped up and repaired by the NHS I was really pleased to be living in this country and not the states - the NHS staff were fantastic - they have my everlasting respect.The NHS is a fantastic institution and is the mark of a civilised society (e.g. the quality of treatment you recieve should not depend on the size of your bank balance).
But then it should be remembered that the NHS was set up by socialists - and socialism appears to be a dirty word in America - and here up until very recently (unless it is employed to bail out the banks/rich through nationalisation measures) .
Saw it a while ago and , whilst your posting has some merit , so too does MMs reporting. They were real people he interviewed on this one and there’s no denying that all is not well “across the pond”.
i’ve got a DVD, never watched it. Michael Moore is a campaign journalist. He is not interested in those so-called balanced/neutral reporting, which is worse actually when biase and ignorance is hidden under the neutral and unbiased disguise, as we have watched so much here:)
I got turned off MM after seeing Bowling for Columbine.
It was all going well until he cornered Charlton Heston. Don’t get me wrong, I agree with the basic message of the film, and don’t (and won’t) support organisations like the NRA, but it was pretty obvious that Heston wasn’t all there.
It was a few cheap points scored from a man with Alzheimer’s. Not really hard-hitting journalism, is it.
Isn’t that the point of his reporting? The US media is so biased towards right-wing free market solutions to every issue and is so prone to deliberatly twisting facts to that view that MM deliberatly challenges that in the same way. If he just sat back and made a balanced docuemntary he would not be challenging the unbalanced message people get the rest of the time.
As for CH, yes he was disagnosed with Alzheimers in 2002, about the time the film ws released, and it does put a downer on the ending of the film, but he didn’t have alzheimers in the 80’s when he chose to abandon his campaigning for gun laws (which he had done since the assasination of Robert Kennedy) and start actively campaigning for the liberalisation of gun laws. He was still official spokesperson for the NRA at the time of the interview.
I take your point, but by swinging the other way I don’t think Moore’s cocking a snook at the right-wing US media - he’s being just as bad. Either way, the people watching get spoon-fed an opinion and swallow it without thinking. And to me, Moore just comes across as a smug know-it-all.
As for Heston, I still reckon it was a low blow; it’s quite obvious he was confused throughout a lot of that interview. That said, I do think the man was an utter, utter fool for his pro-gun stance. 
I prefer Super Size Me, anyway. 