Looks like another entertaining film from Michael Moore. Can't wait to hear the right wing whine about this one.

I'm admittedly left leaning, and I agree with many of Moore's premises and views. However, I have to acknowledge that he does have some serious omissions and obvious biases in his movies. These aren't necessarily bad things, if you know about them ahead of time and go into the film realizing that you're about to watch a piece that actively advocates a particular point of view.

That said, I think he's really quite skilled at propogating information and starting discussions.

Michael Moore serves a purpose in that more people are cognizant of Wall Street in a general fashion, so that's good.

The problem is that he is more interested in capitalizing on populist rage, rather than creating an informed discussion, which is rather bad.

Also, the only thing he could make a citizen's arrest of is a hot dog. ZING!

@thezone: can the left-wing whine about MM too?

@thezone: Ugh, I can.

Is it so much to ask everyone who can't have a POV without hurting their own side, the other side, the debate itself and humanity in general (this means you, Moore, Limbaugh, and pretty much the entirety of the current newsmedia in this country) just go away?

I liked his old documentary on the car industry....

@elocanth: The country has become too passive. We really need some populist rage. Unfortunately it is against healthcare reform based organized by a well-funded misinformation campaign. Some equity needs to come to the current class structures, and these yahoos are all up in arms over imaginary euthanasia legislation.

Proselytize, ho!

I'd like to see MM and Dr. Phil do a joint venture. That would be awesome!

Michael Moore, waging class warfare all the way to the...stomach.

I would love to see Michael Moore and Rush Limbaugh fight to the death. Sadly, it would only raise the level of political discourse in this country.

@MikeF74: I disagree that Americans are too passive... I think the problem is that we're way too worked up about things that don't matter.

One of the primary reasons for misdirected rage is people like Michael Moore and Glen Beck intensifying and misdirecting what could have been an informed debate.

@MikeF74: I'll support a populist rage if it's based upon informed, educated opinion.

People carrying pitchforks because "they terk er jerbs" is never a good thing.

@Vandelay Import Export: Only if the match were in a pool of jello and they both wore bikinis.

@Skankingmike: Ditto. Which is why I have some (possibly misplaced) hope for this documentary. If nothing else, I'm always entertained by his films.

too bad he doesn't have a fucking clue what he's talking about. the people who are fleecing America right now are in charge of the Treasury, the FED, and the SEC.

@elocanth:
Pass the brain bleach, please.

the problem is not Capitalism, it's the concentration of too much power in too few hands. No one is paying attention, the press is too ignorant to understand what is going on (ever watch CNBC?) and the Middle Class is getting their savings (what little they have) destroyed by a weak dollar policy that will continue for the foreseeable future.

Essentially what we have today is the people who are responsible for the oversight of the banking system colluding with the banks to get desired outcomes.

@elocanth: I thought the image someone gave me last night of DobbyxGollum was bad enough, but this takes the cake.

*mutters something about 5 o' clock somewhere*

@thezone: I can't wait to hear the right wing completely dismantle each of his arguments.

By the way, why must it be the right wing who disagrees with him on this? Is this a concession that the left stands for socialism?

@shepd: If by "awesome" you mean "full of hyperbole and pseudoscience" then yes, it will be "awesome".

What I would like is someone to do an actual good documentary that doesn't have to resort to distorting facts and making things up.

@Coelacanth: I will never stop fighting the Goobacks. NEVER.

@aswearengen: Yeah. I'm liberal in most respects but I really hate Michael Moore. None of his documentaries are anywhere near balanced and he always resorts to creative editing to make anyone with an opposing opinion look like an idiot.

I also hear he eats babies but that could be false.

@MrDo: Actually, yeah, he does know what he is talking about. Say what you want about him, but the man is not stupid. You just don't agree.

@Porcelina: I would say he is intelligent but often rather bias in his documentaries. It seems to me that we only get one side of the picture without ALL of the facts.

However, I guess sometimes you have to be bias, loud, and draw attention to your cause if the other side won't play ball.

@outlulz: But how can he be bias in his documentaries? He is a card carrying member of the NRA yet CHOSE to speak out against the columbine shootings and ease of access to guns/ammo?

/sarcasm

@mazzic1083: NOTHING is unbiased. But some people like to think they are and that is dangerous. I like when people admit their bias and move on. It's honest and I think it can put things into perspective for the viewer.

@aswearengen: But that wouldn't be either entertaining and/or show the slanted view of the filmmaker.

@Skankingmike: Yeah, that was probably one of his best films. Before he got sucked in by the crazy over the top stuff.

@mazzic1083: "I would say he is intelligent but often rather bias in his documentaries."

this upsets me. whenever moore's work comes up people shout: "but he's biased!!! you can't make a documentary and be biased!!!"

this is false. like it or not, most works of art have an agenda. that's the nature of art. moore's brand of documentary is meant to persuade, and there's nothing in the documentary handbook that says "you cannot try to persuade your audience."

journalism is supposed to be unbiased and objective (which it obviously isn't and is another issue entirely). documentaries, i think, are not entirely journalism. they're films, just like any other, and by their nature as films, as art, they have to put asses in seats. they have to have viewers.

and i think you're absolutely right in saying "I guess sometimes you have to be bias, loud, and draw attention to your cause if the other side won't play ball."

The problem isn't capitalism, it's the government's willingness--even eagerness--to subvert capitalism. Companies that make bad decisions should fail, that's how capitalism works. If the government weren't so obsessed with propping up the rich, capitalism could do its job and the idiots who drove our economy into the ground would be the latest addition to our homeless population instead of the latest recepients of giant bonuses.

@Porcelina: I vote crack-pipe...

@jokono: "I can't wait to hear the right wing completely dismantle each of his arguments."

Then have real journalists debunk the right-wing 'dismantle' operation.

@jokono: Actually he gets his "facts" correct. However, the logical conclusions he draws are becoming more over the top in my view.

I really enjoyed his early movies and his TV Nation stuff was great too. However recently he's gotten too "preachy" and is feeding his anger on a platter rather than letting us connect the dots and draw our own conclusions. He used to be a bit different than HanBaugh, but he's becoming more and more like them. He should revert more to informing and letting his actions speak for themselves rather than trying to create formulaic drama.

@MrDo: So, we should ignore all the fleecing that when on beforehand with the swaps, derivatives, subprime repackaging, insuring, etc.? We should ignore the things that the Banks are doing with our money right now? It's only the Federal Government that is bad and greedy?

For the people who think that Michael Moore cites erroneous facts, I challenge you to visit his site, where he lists every factual claim he makes, then provides supporting evidence from reliable third parties. Then disprove them.
For those comparing Moore to Limbaugh, I plead with you to show me where on the latter's site he does the same.
For those decrying Moore's tone, and how far removed it is from what you'll see on PBS, I ask, can't we have both?

He makes spirited, provocative documentaries covering areas that are underreported by the traditional media, which often cover dry topics yet does so in an entertaining fashion that gets people talking. Not a bad thing in my book.

@vladthepaler: But we've gotten to the point where the failure of a big financial institution could drag down our entire economy. Also do you really think if the government was hands off, that the failure of a bank would result in homeless CEO's gathered around a barrel fire in an alley? No, they'd give themselves enormous parachutes and only the low level workers would get screwed.

If you really want to get rid of this notion of "too big to fail" without damaging our overall economy, you'd need the following: 1) Don't let institutions get "too big to fail" and/or 2) Establish an improved system where large banks can be "gently" shut down and sold. It's funny those who say "let them fail" are the ones that are actually preventing that from happening. To allow them to fail in a way that wouldn't damage the overall economy, you'd need to force the banks to pay to have the government insure deposits (boo- socialism and regulations), and then the Fed can briefly take over the bank (boo-socialism and regulations), until its either sold and/or liquidated.

@Trai_Dep: You will never get through to these people. Fact is not a word that means the same thing to you as it does to them. They have all been fed the same lines about Moore over and over again by the same outlets until they believe it, then never see a movie and denounce it anyway. If they wanted proof of this I challenge them to watch the recent PBS interview of Wendell Potter (who I believe was an executive for Cigna) whom left he company after 20 years of service to say Moore got it right on with his movie Sicko and that Cigna, along with other healthcare providers sent out a misinformation memo to the major news networks that would use it to just bash him and his movie before it came out. It is proof from the horses mouth that these lines are fed to them.

@ieatcatastrophe: Totally agree on the documentaries are films and have to put asses in seats. It seems that all of the documentaries I have watched play on persuasive arguments with edited shots meant to provoke feelings of rage, sympathy, guilt, sadness, etc.

While these edits may not be necessary from a debate standpoint it adds to the filmmaker's entertainment value and fuels ticket sales. Because let's face it, a scientifically controlled, unbiased documentary would be enlightening but boring as hell which ulitmately equals no audience to educate on the matter at hand and $0 profit.

I guess I just wish that sometimes filmmakers would approach the issues like a journalist who is supposed to strive to be unbiased and objective. The filmmaker wouldn't have to resort to guerrila interview tactics, strategic editing, or sensational footage but just present the facts, have both sides argue their case, and let the viewer decide.

@Porcelina: I think since everyone has their own unique upbringing there will be certain biases that are unintentional or unavoidable. I approach nothing as black and white and always strive to see that grey, middle ground area in between whatever the issue is.

But it would make for a better world if people were recognize their bias, admit it, and if they're happy with that bias move on and continue forward.

@MrDo: I think most agree with you, but what's your proposed solution? That's the essential problem in this country. We both agree that the system is corrupt but we have opposite opinions on how to fix it.

@Trai_Dep: Get a room you two.
Moore is know to cut and edit his side of the story. He quit being a documentarian after Roger & Me and is now sensationalistic "feed the sheeple" movie maker. Farh 9/11, Bowling for Columbine, and Sicko had more special effects and production value then Star Wars 1-6 combined.

I'll cite one well know example. In Bowling for Columbine he begged the bank to give him a gun, even though the banks promotion was a voucher for a gun. He edited out all of the cajoling and all that was left was walk in, fill out some paper work, walk out with a gun. Garbage movie making IMAO

@SillyFTW:

Try again.

The gun was shipped from a vault at another bank branch to the branch being filmed for the movie. The bank retains an active gun dealer's registration with the ATF. The bank was required to send the gun to a local dealer: your local branch.

@ARP:

Also I think it was a pretty bad-ass use of MIA's "Paper Planes" in the preview.

My wife has soured on Moore, but we went to see FH9/11 the night it opened. Still haven't seen Sicko, though I probably should.

Michael Moore may use selective editing and create some of the most uncomfortably comic confrontations ever seen on camera to make his points, but make them he does. The nuggets of truth last long after the credits have rolled.

Most documentaries have a POV. Even Ken Burns's. Especially Spike Lee's. etc etc They are the filmic equivalent of the Op-Ed page. Give the big guy a hand for mastering this particular form.

@Trai_Dep: I agree on the "facts" part and the fact that he at least tries to incite discussions. However, most who attack him don't ever engage in the discussions he's trying to create. They use the Fox News method: 1) He's fat, so he can't possibly care about poor people; 2) He agreed with something a dictator said (even if true) and so everything he's ever said and done cannot be trusted; or 3) He uses a different source for some minutiae that does little to contradict or dilute his argument (e.g. "Oh noes, according to this study, 94.3% of wealth is concentrated with the top 12%, not 94.4% like he says. How can we trust we trust him on anything?")

That being said, I find his actions/conclusions to be a bit hyperbolic now. I understand that's what's needed for good TV/movies, but it creates an opening for those to dismiss him. I liked his earlier stuff better because I think he was still delivering a message, but not beating you over the head with it. For example, the citizens arrest scene is just annoying to me. I get what he's trying to say, but meh.

@jokono: Sure do. It's called being a community.

@ARP:

I would love for someone holding the view that the failure of the entire investment banking industry would have been a good thing to show, in numbers, how in the hell that wouldn't have resulted in absolutely f'in chaos!?

Also, invariably, the people most able to fend for themselves in the event of an absolute collapse of the US economy are usually the last ones to see their jobs disappear. I'm tired of this "Let GM fail, Let AIG fail!" crap, if you want to destroy the economy, go right ahead, but do it in latvia or something.

@DollaValueLIFO: You absolutely should.

It'll leave you speechless and reeling. Plan pizza afterwards. (My cure-all...)