Michael Moore Finds Romance In Recession In Upcoming Flick

Love him or hate him, it’s tough to deny shockumentarian Michael Moore‘s ability to spin a clever, rabble-rousing yarn that gets people talking. So it’s worth keeping a lookout for his new, recession-focused film, due Oct. 2, called Capitalism: A Love Story.

In the movie, framed as a romantic comedy parody, Moore will delve into the culture of greed and distorted economics that left economic integrity stranded at the altar. The MTV Movie Blog quotes Moore’s press release:

“It will be the perfect date movie,” he said. “It’s got it all – lust, passion, romance and 14,000 jobs being eliminated every day. It’s a forbidden love, one that dare not speak its name. Heck, let’s just say it: It’s Capitalism.”

So if this film were a romantic comedy, that would put the majority of the world’s population in the role historically filled by Ralph Bellamy, Bill Pullman and Michael Showalter, who labeled this kind of character as “The Baxter.” Because we’re the ones who got left behind for the more attractive riches, we’re the equivalent of Bellamy’s character in “His Girl Friday” and Pullman’s character in “Sleepless in Seattle.”

Moore goes on to call the Wall Street bailout “the biggest swindle in American history.” Could this be the most depressing date movie of the year?

Michael Moore Is Smitten With ‘Capitalism: A Love Story’ [MTV Movies Blog]
(Photo: phototaker)


Edit Your Comment

  1. apd09 says:

    Michael Moore is a moron. He is nothing more than Howard Stern with a video camera.

    • Corporate_guy says:

      @apd09: Except his stuff is good and Howard stern isn’t interesting.

      • PSUSkier says:

        @Corporate_guy: I beg to differ. About the first part that is. MM is an idiot of epic proportions.

        • moore850 says:

          @PSUSkier: What are the titles of your documentaries (so we can compare how much of an idiot he is to how smart you are)?

          • shepd says:


            Me: Zero documentaries. Score: 0.
            MM: Lots of documentaries. All of which are stupid. Score: -1e15.

            Winner? Nobody.

          • PSUSkier says:

            @moore850: I don’t make documentaries because I don’t have any experience making them, nor did I major in film so I don’t have the necessary skills. So by not doing what I know I would probably suck at, that makes me far more intelligent than Mikey who for some reason feels compelled to make awful, biased documentaries (which is an oxymoron btw). Or, for another example, you may want to think about brushing up your logic skills before you pull them out again.

          • Josh Saint Jacque says:

            @moore850: MM hasn’t made any documentaries, only propaganda. If you’d like me to edit some video clips and lie about or forge sources, then sure MM has me beat.

    • takes_so_little says:

      @apd09: …except Michael Moore is funny.

    • katstermonster says:

      @apd09: Michael Moore is a 50% moron. The stuff he gets right, he really gets right. The stuff he gets wrong…well. Yeah. You know what I mean, clearly.

    • Aphex242 says:

      @r0bVious: Pretty much 100% wrong.

      The true ‘free market’ is what got us guys like Rockefeller and the early transport barons that made ridiculous amounts of money in proportion to their employees. All the money went to a very few people.

      Working conditions were unsafe and wages blew. Ah the good ol’ days.

      Even Nobel Prize winning economists don’t think like you, chief. Shouldn’t that give you pause?

    • GuinevereRucker says:

      @apd09: Totally agree, he’s an idiot.

    • c_c says:

      Roger & Me and Bowling for Columbine were good films. I find it hard to believe that you’ve even seen his movies if your comparison is to Howard Stern. You may not agree with his ideology, but the way he presents it is highly entertaining, funny, and sobering all at the same time.

      • t-r0y says:

        @cc82: Nope, they were stupid films based on opinion and omission of facts. MM is a moron.

        • gaywolverine says:

          @t-r0y: If you are going to say based on “opinion” and omission of facts” you will need to point those facts out.

      • greenunicorns says:


        I didn’t see roger and me, but bowling for columbine was pretty lame. While I round it somewhat compelling to watch, and also pretty entertaining, it completely fails as a documentary because of how incredibly biased it is. And it’s not like it’s stating loads of correct information and simply skipping the step of proving that any counter arguments are invalid, it flat out makes INCORRECT arguments.

        The way he harassed a senile charleton heston was painful to watch. First, charleton heston was too far gone to have a coherent argument. Moore might as well have waited until now to make the movie, and shot that scene at heston’s grave stone and just yelled at that for ten minutes. Secondly, heston didn’t illegally shoot a bunch of children. The nuts who perpetrated the columbine crimes did. What heston did was march in the streets alongside dr martin luther king in order to help transform america from a place where white cops could easily get away with shooting black people in the streets to the kind of place where a black man can be president.

        I think that if moore’s ridiculous wishes about disarming the populace came true, a lot more black americans would have suffered at the hands of a horribly flawed government.

        • trunkwontopen says:

          @greenunicorns: Overall, his documentary and investigating methods that he used in Roger and Me differ from any other film that he did. Sure he is good at finding hard evidence, whether you agree/disagree, or even agree to disagree with him, you can’t pass up the fact that he is good at what he does.

          It’s weird to go back and watch Roger and Me now after the whole GM downward spiral and catch “the beginning” in a film that was put out +15 years ago.

          • Trai_Dep says:

            @trunkwontopen: It’s also amusing that the people saying everything that Moore says is poppycock, when the guy’s web site buttresses every factual claim his films make – in excruciating detail, using generally reliable sources. (If readers doubt this, g’head and visit his site. I dare you).
            If other documentarians from the other side had to do the same, they wouldn’t have much material left to put on the screen.
            …Let alone Fox News. The channel would be one loooong test pattern.

            • greenunicorns says:

              @Trai_Dep: “…poppycock… buttresses…”

              Hey, watch that trash mouth please.

            • trujunglist says:


              Trai trai trai, it’s easier to just say it’s all bullshit rather than actually try to verify the facts, or for the lazy among us, go to the site where Moore himself verifies (or debunks and then apologizes) the facts BECAUSE of people that say he’s full of shit. But wait, surely Moore’s verification of facts is actually all bullshit too, even though he cites everything meticulously as you said…
              P.S. That’d be spectacular if Fox News had to have a running bar that had citations to their facts. Hell, I wouldn’t mind seeing that on any network to tell the truth.

              • Trai_Dep says:

                @trujunglist: I suppose that I’m callow and naive, but I honestly don’t get how people would willfully choose to live life in a shroud of their own making. Or be able to get a decent job if their reasoning was based so heavily on unsupported, irrational “facts”.
                …It doesn’t seem to be a recipe for a very satisfying or rewarding life.

              • ktetch says:

                @trujunglist: And it doesn’t because the FCC requirement that news programs be factually based is a guideline or requirement, rather than a rule or regulation. As such, it doesn’t qualify for whistle-blower protection, And as Fox (and every other major news org in the US) argued, they have the right to distort facts at will. – [www.foxbghsuit.com]

        • Trai_Dep says:

          @greenunicorns: If Heston was too far gone to frame a coherent argument then he shouldn’t have been arguing to begin with. It’s not like Moore nabbed him a couple decades after he was the NRA guy – it was around the same time he allowed himself to be their mascot.
          I believe it’s called accountability for one’s position.

        • gaywolverine says:

          @greenunicorns: Yeah, because the black community is not suffering from gun crime today. Thank god they are all armed to the teeth with AK 47 and 9 millimeters and glocks. Nobody needs a gun. they get them because they have small penises and smaller brains

    • Deranged_Kitsune says:

      I honestly don’t know who that’s more insulting to: Stern or Moore.

    • Josh Saint Jacque says:

      @apd09: I have to agree. This pompous blowhard loves to edit together propaganda and his fans love paying $10 to be spoon fed a friendly point of view.

      He can’t hold his own in a real debate.

    • ElizabethD says:


      Awww, don’t be shy. Tell us how you really feel.

      Also — what Trai Depp said above about Moore’s web site and the facts.

    • Voyou_Charmant says:

      @apd09: Uninspired comment is uninspired.

      Aside from the fact that he is, in almost no way, similar to a shock jock who’s primary interest seems to be getting people naked for the radio and having guest who are literally mentally challenged.

      He, and anyone with the capacity for critical thinking would acknowledge that he is, first and foremost, an entertainer and as such has become one of, if not the, most successful documentary film maker.

      It’s one thing if you don’t agree with him it’s another to say he is in some way mentally disabled. Look at Rush Limbaugh; I don’t agree with Rush Limbaugh, but he is clearly not a moron.

  2. r0bVious says:

    Capitalism would have saved the economy.

    It’s faux-capitalism that destroyed it. Get your head out of your ass, Moore (and the general public, I suppose).

    • Corporate_guy says:

      @r0bVious: That is hilarious. The lack of regulation caused the problems. Faux-capitalism prevents things like this. True capitalism does not.

      • michaelgibbons says:

        @Corporate_guy: The lack of regulation…

        Makes me chuckle everytime. We have plenty of rules and regulations on the books. Where was the SEC for Madoff and Stanford? Where was the Fed for AIG and Bear?

        It’s the crony capitalism and state capitalism that’s destroying this country.

        • gaywolverine says:

          @michaelgibbons: It is allowing companies liek AIG to venture into unregualted areas The FEd had no control over derivatives and the like because since Reagan people have tried to get less regulation. Its why there were sub prime mortgages and risky mortgages, its why there are HMOs that fail peoples health, its why there are ecoli outbreaks from peanut butter. The fine for killing somebody from the ecoli is called cost of doing business, and if it is cheaper than fixing the problem they let it go. The country needs to have more regualtors. The fact that some employees in the Madoff case were incompetent goes to the point that there needs to be TRUE authority to investigate, not just what they agree to

        • BlazerUnit says:

          @michaelgibbons: The Office of Thrift Supervision. Do an honest search on their role in the financial crises, then see how much laughing on the subject you’ll do.

          They are not an example of federal oversight failing, they are an example of manipulating federal oversight into failure.

        • Corporate_guy says:

          @michaelgibbons: The regulations are either bypassed or pretty much for show. Real regulations would have prevented our current situation. The biggest being the removal of the regulation in 1998 that was specifically designed to prevent another depression by preventing different type of banks and financial companies from merging. If that regulation still existed, the current too big to fail companies and single companies with their hand in all markets wouldn’t exist.

      • Josh Saint Jacque says:


        Hundreds of billions of tax payer money later, socialized industries later, and the economy is getting worse, not better. The more the government interferes the worse things get.

    • takes_so_little says:

      @r0bVious: So you’re seen the movie? No? Quit talking out of your ass (and assuming you’re smarter than the general public).

    • veronykah says:

      @r0bVious: Isn’t true capitalism kind of like TRUE socialism, an ideal that could never really exist?

    • Voyou_Charmant says:

      @r0bVious: Nobody is against capitalism; not Moore who uses it to sell his films, not this site who uses it to sell advertising space, not liberals or conservatives who use it day to day from the businesses they run, to the ones they buy from.

      The problem, and the target of this film is unrestrained, pillage and plunder consequences be damned greed driven capitalism that is more focused on paying the CEO’s more year over year than employing American’s or providing benefits to the ones they do employee and providing a safe quality product. It’s targeted at the financial industry that lobbied for less regulation while they cooked the books and created fake companies to sell their own debt to, in order to make their bottom line look better.

      and, well, I don’t even know what “faux-capitalism” is.

  3. cmdrsass says:

    I’m sure this movie has been produced with the same factual accuracy, objectivity, and reasoned analysis as his prior films. /s

    • Keavy_Rain says:

      @cmdrsass: Or his TV show, or his books.

      He has good points and he does highlight real issues, but his BS gets in the way of all that.

      Plus the way he harassed Dick Clark and Charleton Heston in “Bowling for Columbine” just plain pissed me off.

      • greenunicorns says:

        @Keavy_Rain: “the way he harassed Dick Clark and Charleton Heston in “Bowling for Columbine” just plain pissed me off”

        QFT. I almost laughed out loud when I saw the scene where he harasses charleton heston. It was just so strange and completely pointless.

        Most of the movie is structured in such a way that he either takes some time to tell the viewer some ‘facts’ and make an argument, or he goes someplace and gets somebody’s input on something, usually providing more ‘facts’ that prove his argument.

        With heston, he just went to his house, acted polite, and then started to tell heston he was wrong about everything. Then, despite neither heston nor moore taking anything away from the discussion in the form of a changed attitude or realization of common ground, moore thanks heston for his time and leaves. He should have made the next scene one in which he went to a pond and threatened some goldfish because it would have been just about as fitting.

        • trujunglist says:


          So in regards to the goldfish, what you’re saying is that it’s pointless to argue about anything with people that have already formed their opinions. That’s retarded, but I won’t bother explaining why because you’ve already formed your opinion about it. I’m going to go yell at some goldfish instead. They might actually have the brains to do some critical thinking.

    • ARP says:

      @cmdrsass: objective? No. He never intended his films to be. Accurate? Yes. In the sense that he’s showing real documents, filings, statements from politicians and CEO’s. Obviously he puts his spin on them. Reasoned Analysis? He’s hit and miss on that one. Sometimes his logical leap is a bit too far for me. Sometimes, I feel like he lands it. People need to stop acting like MM is trying to pull a fast one on everything by making an “objective documentary.” He’s not, he never said he was. BTW- why not the same outrage for Hannity, Limbaugh, etc.

    • Trai_Dep says:

      @cmdrsass: Visit his site, go to the section where he supports the facts in his films, and disprove them using credible sources. I’ll give you a cookie for every time you can do this.
      …G’head, I’ll wait.

      • greenunicorns says:

        @Trai_Dep: Ha! There is no point in wasting time going into great detail proving Michael Moore wrong. Anybody who knows anything about anything and has even a shred of objectivity can easily see that his movies are full of a health mix of facts, near facts, and flat out flawed opinions, all presented as facts. Because of this, he has no credibility as a documentarian.

        It’s possible to enjoy his films, or parts of them, in spite of this fact, but it doesn’t change that. You strike me as somebody who is deeply in love with Moore, so there is probably no convincing you that he could possibly do anything wrong, but really, how long can you tell yourself that your idol is infallible without having to jump through a serious amount of hoops?

  4. kylere says:

    Michael Moore is a fat, druggie, white, rich, convinced he is right, pushing a far left wing agenda by lying

    Rush Limbaugh is fat, druggie, white, rich, convinced he is right, pushing a far right wing agenda by lying

    • takes_so_little says:

      @kylere: Waaa! Everything sucks! Waaa! /emo off

    • PSUSkier says:

      @kylere: I think that about sums it up.

    • Aphex242 says:

      @kylere: Michael Moore’s a druggie? News to me.

      • kylere says:

        @aphex242: He is from Davison, Michigan, and a known pothead. ‘Nuff said. He is the anti-Michael-Phelps for marijuana law reform.

        • Aphex242 says:

          @kylere: Oh, got it. Good for him… finding more common ground.

        • varro says:

          @kylere: Michael Moore might be “known”, but Rush Limbaugh is a *convicted* druggie.

        • ElizabethD says:


          “A known pothead” — OMG. Lock up your children. Bar the doors.


        • trujunglist says:


          Not sure why it matters that he’s from Davison, MI, but I’ll bite on this one.
          Now, I’m not entirely certain (oh wait, yes I am thanks to google), but Mr. Moore never said anything about how marijuana is evil and that the war against marijuana and drugs is right.
          However, we ALL know that Mr. Limbaugh DID talk about how evil drugs are, yet was all over some pills like Dr. fucking Mario. That’s called being a hypocritical ass.
          There’s a difference, a big one, about as fat as Rush’s head.

    • Voyou_Charmant says:

      @kylere: Bringing up Michael Moore really riles up the worthless commenter’s, huh?

      Michael Moore is a drug addict?

    • runswithscissors says:

      @kylere: Michael Moore and Rush Limbaugh are both fabricated characters (and bodysuit disguises) of the greatest actor of all time: Fred Savage.

      • Nekoincardine says:

        @runswithscissors: @aphex242: Well, I’d say Ben Stein counts now, in at least a single sense of the word “successful”. Then again, most of the things that make Moore films, well, Moore films… Don’t seem to apply to Stein’s films. Plus Stein became recognized for WIN BEN STEIN’S MONEY, not documentaries.

        … Now that I think about it, Moore doing a parody of Ben Stein’s money would be hilarious.

  5. takes_so_little says:

    I have gotten more consistent laughs out of Michael Moore’s movie than any other filmmaker in recent memory. For that reason alone, I’ll see this movie.

    I think a lot of people hating on Moore have the incredibly condescending attitude that while THEY are smart enough to see the films as propaganda, the peasantry is bound to take them as gospel truth.

    • apd09 says:

      @takes_so_little: it is not that “the peasantry will take it as gospel truth” it is that if you are going to make a documentary then you should be doing it objectionably so that the whole story is put forth. He does not give the whole story and instead just presents his views. It is no longer a documentary but purely as you put it “propaganda” so any mildly intelligent person is insulted at the way he presents things because he tries to pass it off as truth in a documentary style but fails.

      • katstermonster says:

        @apd09: I have to agree on that, mostly. You have to admit, though…the stuff he gets right is excellent and needs to be said. I just wish it were someone else saying it. Or editing it. Or something…

      • Aphex242 says:

        @apd09: “objectionably” lol

        You, sir, win the Internet. Accidentally.

      • mazzic1083 says:

        @apd09: I think most documentaries are going to be subjective and sided with the filmmaker. Any issue that is important enough to a filmmaker to produce a documentary about it will generate certain feelings in said filmmaker; these feelings are bound to accidentally make it to the final product

      • takes_so_little says:

        @apd09: *Sigh*

        Completely missed my point. I find the films funny, and the political viewpoint doesn’t get me wrankled like it does some.

      • Jeremy82465 says:

        @apd09: I dont think any intelligent person is insulted at all. I think most intelligent people understand he is trying to push his side of the arguement. I have no personal problem with be because I acknowledge this, know that he is pulling facts he wants us to know and ignoring the ones he doesnt so I know to take it with a grain of salt. The problem I have is the other side presenting what they claim are facts that I have to take with the great salt lake just to get any information from, and they present it as news. News? My god man!!!

      • WhoAsked You says:

        @apd09: Hmmm then how much WORSE is Fox “News” calling themselves a “NEWS” channel and putting out propaganda 24/7.

        Indy filmmakers can do whatever they want. But further his views are FACTUALLY based, RESEARCHED, etc. Don’t call them lies just because you don’t like his beliefs.

        The fact you get on here before the movie is even out and you even have any proof of anything in this film shows very clearly you are not capable of being logical or objective in your vile hatred of the man.

        Want to base your comments then on his previous films? Fine – start naming some specific facts and which films they were from that he got wrong….we’re waiting.

    • kylere says:

      @takes_so_little: Ahhh a fanboi, now your comments make sense.

    • Prole says:

      @takes_so_little: I’ve enjoyed his films as well. It doesn’t mean that I agree with him, to the contrary actually.

      I get the feeling we’re on the same page here.

    • Voyou_Charmant says:

      @takes_so_little: and a heart click for you…

    • RogerTheAlien says:

      @takes_so_little: Everyone far-(insert direction here) nutjob has a steady troupe of followers. Moore is no different from any right-wing idiot. They’re all entitled to their opinions, they’re not setting policy in any way, shape, or form, so they’re basically just ineffectual talking heads pushing some f*ed-up (according to whom you’re speaking) agenda that 50% of people won’t agree with. Ugh…why are people so crazed about this shit?!

  6. ARP says:

    MM makes entertaining documentaries with an agenda. Are they the gospel truth? No. They were never intended to be straight journalism documentaries. Why do you watch Hannity, Beck or Limbaugh? They lie all the time and they’re on all the time. Why do you watch liars? Why are you ranting about them. Because we like watching things that reinforce our beliefs.

    • HIV 2 Elway says:

      @ARP: What do Fox News blowhards have to do with this post? I don’t see anyone claiming that TV news talking heads are unbiased.

      • Aphex242 says:

        @HIV 2 Elway: Because there’s not a successful conservative doppleganger of Michael Moore, so he found the next closest thing?

        It’s a valid point, regardless of the example.

        • ARP says:

          @aphex242: Exactly. I also think too often we get caught in the details and give in to the pundit attack techniques rather than consider the broader questions that are presented. “Oh noes, MM gave money to an organization, who gave money to another organization, who hired a speaker that said something that if you twist beyond its logical context, is Anti-American. Everything else he says is now worthless.” Where is the appropriate line in the capitalism socialism spectrum? Is some socialism good for capitialism (e.g. socialized health care, or government owning power or cable lines)? What’s the role of government in protecting the consumer (if any)?

  7. Anonymous says:

    Hey, that’s a picture of the theater in Northern Michigan that MM helped reopen, bring jobs back downtown and revitalizing the core my hometown. Thanks Michael!
    Yes, he has opinions. Every documentary has a viewpoint, and MM doesn’t hide his. Hey, if you don’t like what he’s portraying, go film your side of the story, provide a counterpoint, start an argument!

  8. AllanG54 says:

    So, if Moore is mocking capitalism (of which he is a HUGE part since investment in his movies make him quite wealthy) then he must be … dare I say it…a communist.

    • Aphex242 says:

      @AllanG54: It must be nice seeing the world in stark black and white all the time.

      Wait scratch that- I bet it sucks.

    • Trai_Dep says:

      @AllanG54: So, you’re in support of the Wall Street shenanigans that crashed the global economy? Excellent!!

      • t-r0y says:

        @Trai_Dep: Not this again. Blarney Frank, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, and insane gov’t regulations intended to make politicians rich caused the crash of the global economy.

    • trujunglist says:


      Michael Moore gave away his last movie for free. So, yeah, he’s a communist.



    • Voyou_Charmant says:

      @AllanG54: It’s like Sarah Palin made a bunch of user names and posted a series of increasingly less thought out comments.

      1) The movie is not critical of capitalism as an economic platform. It’s critical of the exploitative nature of big business that has been wildly successful at shaking any sort of regulatory oversight since the early to mid ’80s.

      2) There is nothing remotely logical about calling a capitalist who is critical of certain capitalistic activities and exploitative behavior a communist.

  9. Anonymous says:

    I’m counting on Michael Moore’s catering bill alone to revitalize the demand side of the economy.

    For those of you who think Moore is the second coming of the People’s Revolution, consider this:

    1. He’s cheap – the people that work on his projects routinely are underpaid

    2. He’s anti-union – he has fired writers for insisting on union wages on his jobs

    3. He’s a hypocrite – Moore has owned Halliburton/KBR stock, the same company that he rails against as “war profiteering”.

    4. He’s a lair – The CEO of GM did meet with him (Moore claims otherwise) and the Nick Berg interview that he scrubbed from Fahrenheit 9/11 was removed before the guy was killed (Moore claimed he did it out of respect for Berg).

    Moore is a fat, lying turd. If you’re a leftist, you can definitely do better for a spokesman people.

  10. dangerp says:

    Actually, I believe Michael Moore is the “biggest swindle in american history”.

  11. I Love New Jersey says:

    He lost his touch after Roger and Me. Maybe he should do a movie about the crazy plan to bulldoze a good portion of Flint.

  12. takes_so_little says:

    Has anyone commenting here seen the fucking movie yet? Sheesh.

    • JoeDirt says:

      @takes_so_little: A commie walks into a bar with a pile of poo in his hand and says “It looks, smells, and tastes like poo. I’m sure glad I didnt step in it.” Morel of the story: You dont have to pay this joker $10 to see his movie to know its crap. All capitalist should know that.

      • ElizabethD says:


        “Morel” of the story? I’ll have mine sauteed in butter and served alongside some marinated flank steak, please.

        What? Oh. Never mind…..

        • PSUSkier says:

          @ElizabethD: ooooh… Attacking someone’s point of view by pointing out problems with their spelling acumen. OH SNAP! /s

        • JoeDirt says:

          @ElizabethD: What are you a English teacher. GFY

          • Prole says:

            @JoeDirt: *an* English teacher? Look, it’s okay. It’s only your native language. You’re not required to be good at it.

            It does help your credibility if you at least try though.

            • Prole says:

              @Prole: …sorry, I really don’t care how you spell. I just disagree with your sentiments so strongly that I feel the need to insult your intelligence and character.

              I shouldn’t do that. Sorry.

              • JoeDirt says:

                @Prole: If one miss spelled word is all you can find to insult me with, go ahead. I have a Masters in Industrial Engineering. Real heavy on the math and science as you know, oh wait, you don’t know. You want a socialized world so all of us that did the right thing, like get an eduction can pay for your health care while you work at Whataburger. Good luck with that.

                • Trai_Dep says:

                  @JoeDirt: Don’t they have breadth requirements where you’re from?
                  I know that, here in the People’s Republic of California, even engineers are expected to be able to, y’know, spell. And exhibit reasoned, fact-supported thought.
                  But we Godless Commies are parsnicky in that way.

                  • JoeDirt says:

                    @Trai_Dep: I do know that in a debate that if one side starts to scrutinize things such as your spelling, that party is scared of your words. That party cannot debate with you due to incompetence on their part so they will try to save face by attacking little things such as “morels vs. morals”. But you being from california would know nothing about morals. Go eat some cali-skanks placenta and stick a gerbil in your….. well, you know what to do.

                    • Prole says:

                      @JoeDirt: I’ve apologized for criticizing your spelling and grammar. We’re all vulnerable to making those mistakes.

                      I’d love to engage in a reasoned debate with you, but I don’t see any supporting facts for your arguments. You threw, what appeared to be, a poorly constructed joke into the comment thread. It’s inflammatory, but there’s no real content there. It’s meaningless trolling.

                      There’s nothing wrong with trolling. Actually, I rather like trolls who challenge our opinions with reasoned arguments. After all, they are often playing devil’s advocate to themselves. I know that by responding I encourage their behavior, and I intend to do so. I like to seek out opinions that differ from my own. I like to make my best effort to be open minded to the point where I can even allow myself to moderate an earlier position, or even be convinced away from it. Have you ever tried that?

                      I’ll check back and see if you have anything pertinent to say. I suspect you won’t though. You have yet to submit a thoughtful comment.

                    • JoeDirt says:

                      @Prole: I’m about done with having to go back 3 days of comments talking to a commie. But you are the one with nothing pertinent to say, only personal attacks which have left you looking sophomoric. My point was quite clear, I don’t have to pay this pant load $10 to know that his films are crap. Now go get some botox injected between your ears, it may help with the brain farts. Over and out.

                    • Prole says:

                      @JoeDirt: Why so unreasonable? You accuse me of making personal attacks, but you’ve done little else.

                      You can at least try to make a reasoned argument. If you feel you already have, do you mind pointing me to where it is? What is your argument? How does disagreeing with you make me a communist? Where is your CONTENT!?

                      You don’t have any. Own up.

                      I can keep this up forever. I’m just trying to help JoeDirt. Why not admit that your comments are over the top? You could help yourself out by supplying some supporting facts. Anything will do.

      • trujunglist says:


        Yes, because having a dissenting opinion on something means that you’re TOTALLY 100% against it, rather than maybe trying to get it fixed so that it works well for everyone.

  13. JoeDirt says:

    Moore is a commie weasel. He should be sent to North Korea.

  14. takes_so_little says:

    Just realized something else i find hilarious about MM movies: the absurd level of outrage and self-righteous indignation they stir up! Sometimes people who are unable to relax a little are just plain amusing.

  15. acklenheights says:

    Michael Moore is an “only in America” phenomenon. He makes a ton of money by pandering to self-congratulatory know-it-alls by presenting a horribly one-sided, simplified view of divisive issues. In this case, he is hilariously mocking a bastardization of the very system that turned him from an obese white-trash burnout into a highly politically connected populist millionaire. Good for him. It’s a free country and he’s clever enough to exploit a naive segment of the population who want their opinions reconstituted and spoon-fed to them.

    But you capitalism-bashers need to understand the difference between capitalism and corporatism.

    Obscenely powerful megacorps thrive under corporatism, which basically means mutually beneficial cooperation between highly lucrative companies and government officials. See: General Electric, Fannie Mae, Lockheed Martin, etc. This is what Michael Moore is attacking even though he gives it the incorrect moniker of “capitalism”

    True free-market capitalism is actually very unfriendly to megacorps since it punishes the inefficiency that often creeps up in large companies that have so many positions dedicated to non-productive endeavors.

    • ARP says:

      @acklenheights: I think you’re wrong on a number of your points, but would like to focus on one. I don’t think MM is communist or full on socialist (i.e. he doesn’t want government to own ALL means of production). I find it annoying that people keep implying that. I think many of us on the left-ish side, like capitalism, but not the unbridled capitalism that you espouse because we don’t think it will work and will do us and the rest of the country more harm than good in the long run.

      • michaelgibbons says:

        @ARP: Obama uses that unbridled capitalism phrase all the time. It’s how he had a dovish agenda for foreign policy, but still thinks it’s okay to bomb Pakistan and ramp up Afghanistan.

        Don’t drink the Kool-Aid.

        Fraud should be punished. And we don’t need more agencies or rules to punish fraud.

        • acklenheights says:

          @michaelgibbons: I hate to get political since I hate both parties equally, but Obama is scared to death of capitalism, since corporatism made him.

          • ARP says:

            @acklenheights: Corportism has made most of our presidents for a while now.

            • acklenheights says:

              @ARP: Thanks for clarifying your point of view. Corporatism/capitalism is a debate that’s beyond the scope of this discussion, but from what I’ve read and concluded by pondering over what I’ve read, corporatism requires a strong central government. Capitalism thrives in the absence of one. Now, I’m not saying free-markets = anarchism, I’m saying that true free-market capitalism requires a peaceful, orderly society without a large federal government that encroaches on local affairs.

              Again, it’s a discussion beyond the realm of a comments section, but corporatism would have no leverage in the absence of a large and powerful centralized government.

            • acklenheights says:

              @ARP: Word.

      • acklenheights says:

        @ARP: You don’t even deserve a response since you clearly didn’t read my post.

        When did I say, or even imply, that MM is a socialist or communist? He has explicitly defined himself as a populist and he had a front-and-center seat at the DNC. Again, I’m not condemning him. I’m just saying it’s humorous and clever how he’s made his money and what his current approach is this time.

        Something tells me you don’t understand what free-market capitalism really is or how it works. Let’s test you out: name one country/society that rigorously adheres to its principles. hint: it’s not the United States.

        You can think I’m “wrong on a number of my points” but it doesn’t help your case if you can’t demonstrate a basic understanding of what I’m saying bro.

        • acklenheights says:

          @acklenheights: And I agree with MM’s underlying hatred towards corporatism, based on what I’ve read by him. I just wish he’d correctly define it as corporatism, and not capitalism. He doesn’t seem to understand–or willfully ignores–the mutual back-scratching of megacorps and federal gov’t.

          But whatever, he’s free to say what he wants and people are free to throw their money at him to hear more.

        • ARP says:

          @acklenheights: Actually, you’re right. I didn’t read your post carefully enough and I apologize for that. You’re right that MM is able to thrive and bite the hand that feeds him.

          I do, however, know the difference between corporatism and capitalism but disagree with the premise that corportism (or the elements of it) would not happen in free-market capitalism. That’s like saying abuse of power would not happen in a communist system, it’s simply not realistic with government infrastructure lest you end up like Somalia. Perhaps you can somehow limit it, but I think that would require further government action to impose that which would then cause you to drift away from the initial premise.

    • WhoAsked You says:

      @acklenheights: You’re right he is so unfair, he only shows the truth, not lies, how one-sided is that?

      But I’m glad you and I agree on the evils of corporatism at least. Used to work for Lock-Ness Martin, couldn’t agree more.

      • acklenheights says:

        @trujunglist: I read the material of people I disagree with so I can understand where they’re coming from and square up their beliefs with mine so I challenge my preconceptions and become a better informed person. IRL I’m a lot of fun to discuss and debate with, largely because I try to be well-informed and understand why people hold the opinions they do.

        With that said, I have read plenty of stuff by MM, and he has explicitly stated he wants capitalism thrown out as a system of government. He favors increased centralized control of the American economy, specifically by the Obama administration. Read his recent blog entries if you want to argue this.

        And again, whatever. If that’s what he thinks, fine. If he wants to make a movie and get more rich from it, great. That’s his right as an American citizen, even if he would be one to stand on the sidelines and cheer as others are destroyed by failed economic policies.

        But in his writings he routinely points out examples of corporatism and says in no uncertain terms that capitalism is absolutely a failed system due to these gross abuses of power by government and their corporate funders. This is demonstrably incorrect, and is laughable logic to those who bother to be well-informed before vomiting out their opinions. For those who have trouble reading and understanding, he points out the flaws of corporatism and big-government favoritism and dresses them as capitalism. But he’s free to do so and entertain others in the process.

        Just don’t count on seeing him attack the Democratic Party, which holds a portion of the blame for the many flaws corporatism.

    • trujunglist says:


      You know, I dislike portions of the Xbox 360 dashboard a LOT and criticize those portions. That must mean I am 100% opposed to the 360 dashboard and cannot use it without being a hypocrite.
      You haven’t seen the movie but just assume what will happen in it, which is pretty nifty. I’m fairly certain that MM doesn’t hate capitalism, he hates what you describe as corporatism and that a lot of this movie will focus on the shitty parts of our version of capitalism rather than rail on capitalism in general. But hey, I haven’t seen it either, I’m just going off of common sense along with his other material.


      Thank you.

    • Voyou_Charmant says:

      @acklenheights: Speaking of “know-it-alls” “True free-market capitalism is actually very unfriendly to megacorps since it punishes the inefficiency that often creeps up in large companies that have so many positions dedicated to non-productive endeavors.”

      Though, I agree with the bulk of your statement that last bit is utter nonsense. Unless you’re talking about a fantasy world.

      Sure; just like anarchism, socialism, communism, libertarianism, etc etc etc free market capitalism works perfectly in utopia, but in the real world, profit and greed at the expensive of everyone and everything is the bottom line, corporations have more control over policy than the electorate and a lack of regulation allows companies to buy up everything in their way. If there is no competition, it doesn’t matter how inefficient and non-productive your company is. That’s what happens in real-world free market capitalism.

      • acklenheights says:

        @Voyou_Charmant: Hey! Hey! Look wayyyy off in the distance. It’s almost on the horizon. See it? Yeah, that little speck. That’s my argument that completely went past you.

        We do not have free market capitalism in the United States. We have had a corporatist system for decades. It is not a recent phenomenon. This is not the fault of free-market capitalism.

        If you’re truly interested in reading multiple arguments and perspectives of this issue, please tell me (dcdorset at gmail.com) because I will give you an extensive reading list that includes books I agree and disagree with. Most people just stick with their first impression, hence I won’t waste my time unless you express interest.

        It is mainly the fault of a government that inexorably becomes larger and more centralized due to crises real or imagined and the electorate that looked to government to solve their problems.

  16. post_break says:

    I love the people who say Michael Moore is an idiot/useless/fat/disgusting. Sure, I don’t like him. I don’t like his movies. However, on a propaganda level the man is very smart. Just try to watch one of his movies without just accepting everything he says at face value and see his different propaganda techniques.

    • ARP says:

      @post_break: He his fat and disgusting. I mean, you’re a millionaire now, at least get clothes that fit and get a haircut.

      • WhoAsked You says:

        @ARP: He’s a millionaire now, he can do what he wants – he earned his own money, he didn’t get it from you. Shut up.

        • ARP says:

          @WhoAsked You: He actually did. I’ve seen a number of his movies. He brings up a lot of good issues. I don’t always agree with his analysis or heavy handed approach, but the issues he raises are important.

  17. Lisa Cebrian says:

    i’m so glad to hear that michael moore is coming out with his personal biography. i always love to watch/learn about the rise of a blossoming franchise, how they got started, meet the faces behind the business, etc.

    oh, this isn’t a personal biography? well, the title is certainly deceiving.

    • WhoAsked You says:

      @Lisa Cebrian: Do you have any legitimate criticism of something you haven’t even seen yet? Didn’t think so.

    • Voyou_Charmant says:

      @Lisa Cebrian: Mrs. Palin, I know you’re just running out the clock until you’re officially out of office, but you need to find a better way to spend your free time than posting incoherent strings of words on the internet.

      • RogerTheAlien says:

        @Voyou_Charmant: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH. Palin is a idiot. HAHAHAHAHAHA. You made a funny. HAHAHAHAHA. My magin interwebs box does joke-time.

        Can these threads spin any MORE out of control? Grow the fuck up.

  18. Jevia says:

    Kindof expecting this movie to focus on all those wonderful corporate bonuses that management gets in the millions. You can call it capitalism, I just call it greed.

  19. MostlyHarmless says:


    Two things…
    1. People who take sides just for the sake of it hardly ever listen to reason.
    2. The average person does not like being told the truth. They cant handle the truth. Everyone is guilty of truth-un-handle-able-ness, but the average person is very much opposed to being pushed out of the comfort zone. And 50% of the population is even less inclined.

    • Five says:

      @MostlyHarmless: Resolution of cognitive dissonance, really: “This film is making me uncomfortable because it challenges my views. Uh…it must be because he’s stupid! And fat! And hairy! Haha, now I don’t have to listen to you, lying stupid man!”

      • MostlyHarmless says:

        @Five: I must say, I am not quite sure if you are agreeing with me or mocking me :P

      • RogerTheAlien says:

        @Five: Okay…but the same could be send for people that love to be spoon-fed whatever (potential) lie or bent-truth he’s shilling. “This film makes me feel justified because this man, aside from being fat and hairy, it angry for all the same uninspired reasons that I, too, feel angry. That makes me smile. Happy Face Smile! I AM RIGHT. Because fat, hairy man said so.”

        So…perhaps we should all just take him for whatever we think he is, pro or con, and just live and let live.

  20. Anonymous says:

    Say what you will but Sicko and Bowling for Columbine were great movies. too bad about the cuba part in sicko, otherwise, truthful and great movie.

  21. MercyEleusis says:

    I don’t even have to see it to know he’s going to blame Bush.

    • ARP says:

      @MercyEleusis: But if Bush was a major contributing factor to the problems we’re facing, why not blame him? If someone caused or contributed to a problem, it’s not the “liberal media” or bias, to say that they contributed to the problem. Fox News has successfully created this shield around Bush where if anyone tries to fault his administration’s decisions, actions, or inactions, they’re just a emotional, reactionary, Bush-hater that lacks reason. Some people are, they’ll blame Bush for stubbing their toe, but that should not obscure reasoned criticism of any leader. Perhaps to your point, I think Bush does share some of the blame for current economic conditions. He didn’t personally, securitize bad mortgages, but I think he created an air of “anything goes” by not enforcing regulations, not monitoring banks and investment houses, and engaging in poor fiscal policy (e.g. maintaining interest rates that essentially created free money for banks). Also he was the one one that actually created TARP and its rules (or lack thereof). Of course, Obama isn’t exactly cracking the whip either.

      • trunkwontopen says:


        Well said, ARP.

        You climb the rope of shame up high enough, you will see that its tied to one and only one person. Not to get into a political debate, or start an argument, but the country was slipping for quite some time. I don’t think anyone that had a pulse on the whole economic situation from the past 10 years can sit there and say that Bush was not the one (or one of) that pushed that stone over the edge.

        I’m assuming that he would somehow pull Obama into the movie as well, and as well that he should. So far, Obama is not impressing me that much, and I voted for him.

    • Voyou_Charmant says:

      @MercyEleusis: Or maybe it’s a throwback to blaming Clinton — like he did in the 90s.

      From Reagan to Bush SR to Clinton to G.W Bush we have seen a near-complete deterioration of regulatory safeguards which helped build this country after Theodore Roosevelt inacted sweeping regulations and have kept this country stable since the great depression when laissez-faire policies of Coolidge and Hoover and then a spending freeze shoved us into a depression.

      Everyone seems to forget his equally critical/funny assault on Bill Clinton and literally any politician who allows themselves to be a target of his cause du jour.

  22. PsiCop says:

    Great. That’s all we need … to have the recent meltdown compounded by a heaping dose of Moore’s sanctimony. He has a habit of creating “straw men” and tilting at them in an effort to appear either funny or pithy. He ends up ridiculing the ridiculous, which is no challenge, and because he does not really address his target directly, just ends up creating unnecessary rancor, in place of genuine understanding.

    I’d prefer to see some viable and rational solutions. Abject worship of “free markets” obviously has gotten us where we are, however, Moore’s ridicule of said abject worship is not likely to help.

    • ARP says:

      @PsiCop: It happens on both sides. What’s the right’s straw man, a person that can somehow be:

      1) A right wing muslim jihadist
      2) A left wing Godless liberal
      3) A iron fisted fascist who’s going to put everyone in camps
      3) A wuss and won’t stand up to anyone
      4) Someone who is trying to take our freedoms
      5) Someone who wont take away enough freedoms
      6) A populist/socialist who is opposed to corporations
      7) A corportist who is owned by the corporations

      But I agree that he creates an extreme characture of his enemy and it dilutes the message. The problem we face more and more every day is that the only person we listen to is the person that’s yelling.

      • PsiCop says:

        @ARP: You’re right, it happens on ALL sides. No doubt about that! But that’s why this sort of thing has to STOP, not be propagated even further. This is because:

        1. Two wrongs don’t make a right. That Moore’s ideological opponents use “straw men,” does not constitute permission for him to do so, too.

        2. Lying in the name of the truth, is an offense to the truth itself, and clouds it rather than enlightening people. It inherently discredits the person who uses such a tactic.

        3. The more people lie in the name of whatever truth they tell, the more lies we hear, and the truth eventually vanishes, because no one’s interested in it any more. The lies are all anyone cares about.

        Ultimately the “They lied, so I’m allowed to lie!” philosophy is going to lead the country into ideological gridlock, where nothing ever gets done because neither ideology will let go of its self-righteousness long enough to do something other than attack the other. It’s like someone whose fingers are stuck in one of those Chinese finger-traps; so long as they keep trying to yank themselves free, they never will be … yet if they gave in a little and loosened up, they’d be fine.

        We need people to be courageous enough to let go of the ideological struggle. Moore is doing the opposite; he turns up the heat instead of lowering it. It won’t help.

  23. WhoAsked You says:

    And I cannot wait for all the Fox-Zombie Moore-haters to react and say

    1. The economy is wonderful.
    2. There have been no job losses that was all made up.
    3. It isn’t bankers’ job to make loans, be ethical or care about the nation or their customer’s lives. They have a right to sit there on piles of money given to them expressly for loaning out and disregard the contractual conditions Congress put on it because they can, because they are so generous, because that’s capitalism (well, even though it’s really socialism, we’ll call it capitalism). I mean it’s banker’s RIGHT to step all over anyone 24/7, lie cheat steal, and backstab and face-stab to get ahead and make a buck and how DARE anybody interfere with or criticise that!
    4. We don’t care how many cold hard facts Moore puts in the film, no matter how much he researched it, how many unassailable experts are featured, they are in his film so they are economic conspiracy theorists and liberal this-and-thats.
    5. The economy is all psychological, there are more jobs than ever so anyone unemployed did something to get fired, it’s their fault, they deserve to be permanently unemployed and so do their kids, and not get unemployment either, ever. I’ve been steadily employed, have come early and left late and taken 10 minute lunches, worked nights weekends and holidays, and multitasked and put in 170% every single god damn solitary second of my whole life since I was 12 years old (and before that walked uphill both ways in 5 feet of snow to school every day) and never taken unemployment, why shouldn’t they?
    6. How DARE Moore care about fat lazy stupid poor people – it’s their fault, and they had diseases on purpose to waste health care funds, especially the kids.
    7. Moore is unAmerican.
    8. Moore is fat and ugly.

    And that my friends is the typical Fox News viewer mentality.

    • VikingP77 says:

      @WhoAsked You: I heart you!

    • bobcatred says:

      @WhoAsked You: How about “Michael Moore is about as unbiased as Fox News?”

      Much like Fox News, there is a thread of truth in what Michael Moore says, but he panders so much to one side of the political spectrum that I don’t have any faith in the information he provides. His movies are more op. ed. than documentary, which is fine, except he’s presenting his work as being unbiased and “the absolute truth” when he has a habit of leaving information that doesn’t serve his purpose out. It’s fine to like and watch Michael Moore’s movies, but they absolutely shouldn’t be your only source of information on an issue.

      • RogerTheAlien says:

        @bobcatred: +1.

        Both are equally guilty of some form of BS with a trace amount of truth as the glue that awkwardly holds the BS together. He’s like the anti-Limbaugh. Both are outspoken and only somewhat capable of being unbiased and completely objective (and by somewhat, I mean hardly at all). So take everything either of them says with a LOT of grains of salt, and some ability to think for yourself and do some inde-fucking-pendent research.

  24. ageshin says:

    I, for one, am looking forword to MM’s new film. I have enjoyed his work in the past, and presents a point of view that is rarely heard in this country. As for Moore being a commie, remember that the greatest capitalist country in the world today is China. I might also point out that it is very American to critizise the powers that be. If you dislike Moore then you also hate Mark Twain, or Will Rodgers, who also had critacal thing to say about our great government. After all it was Will Rodgers who said that we have, ‘ the best congress that money can buy.’.

    • RogerTheAlien says:

      @ageshin: Another +1.

      The US was founded on many ideals, not the least of which is free speech and, putting it plainly, the ability to question the government’s action(s). I personally disagree with a hefty portion of Moore’s stances and comments, but he knows how to work an audience, has an opinion to which he’s entitled, and is voicing it – albeit rather one-sidedly – but that’s what makes America land of the free and home of the brave. I may dislike what he has to say, but he’s literally fulfilling the Founding Father’s dreams.

      Voltaire: I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. (Translation may be a bit off… for all you critics)

  25. GTB says:

    Eh, I’m a pretty big Michael Moore fan. I still think Roger & Me was his best film, but the others have been pretty good. And with some exceptions for a few really awkward bits starring a dude dressed in a chicken suit, his tv shows have been pretty good too.

  26. KMan13 still wants a Pontiac G8 says:

    So, he goes on and makes a movie about the recession, which doesn’t affect him, because we’re going to pay so much money to see his movie, which he earns royalties on. Lovely!!!

  27. Anonymous says:

    To those who would deride Moore as some sort of hypocritical, self-serving slug comparable to the Rush-types (who actually are hypocritical, self-serving slugs) consider one thing the man has accomplished here in Traverse City, Michigan.

    Google the State Theater in TC. Moore walked the walk of his politics by envisioning, promoting and accomplishing the transformation of a vacant movie theater into a community movie theater which also sponsors a yearly film festival that contributes big bucks to the local economy.

    By the way, I’ve met the man. He is both an accessible and unpretentious individual who gives of his time unselfishly when he need not. The real deal kids.

    What have his detractors here accomplished that is comparable? Sucked a tea bag?

  28. gaywolverine says:

    Anybody who says this country was built on capitalism really needs a history lesson. Henry Ford was an avowed racist. Most of the entire economy was built on the backs of slavery. Rockefeller and most of the old school wealthy did things that are illegal, but nobody stopped them because they had money and power. The Kennedy money is ill gotten as well.

  29. golddog says:

    Maybe he’ll ambush Bernie Madoff in prison for the new flick. Blech.

    Moore wants to do something useful, he should make a movie about cell phone exclusivity deals or grocery shrink rays.

  30. Anonymous says:

    Michael Moore wants to tax multi-millionaires to the point where universal health care can be offered to the poor masses for free, even if this means no more rich people, period.


    Anyone remember when the owner of the anti-Moore site, Moorewatch, was almost forced to shut it down due to – ironically enough – an expensive medical emergency, but Mike donated a few grand to the cause and life went on? (The site is still up, but comatose.)

    I, too, am over way my head in medical debt through no fault of my own, and repeatedly tried to contact multi-millionaire Michael Moore to see if he would reprise his paradigm of the rich (regardless of race, creed, color, political affiliation) giving to the poor (regardless of their race, creed, color, political affiliation) with no strings attached.

    Nothing. So I asked said site owner if he could perhaps reach out, but he, too, basically told me to “get f-cked, a–hole.”

    It may be too late for many of the sick and disabled to wait for President Obama, whom Michael campaigned and likely voted for, to confiscate Michael Moore’s upcoming “Captialism” payday, much less distribute it fairly. It seems the masses need to remind Michael of this serious problem, ask him to remember his roots and convictions by donating, again, freely, now.