MovieChat Forums > Roger & Me (1989) Discussion > Moore Actually Met With Roger?

Moore Actually Met With Roger?

posted 16 years ago by thomashelgen
6 replies | jump to latest

I'm not a crazy right winger. I'm not someone who dismissed Moore's films before I even saw them. I'm a democrat and liberal, but above all, I am someone who fights for an honest debate. I have recently come to the conclusion that Micheal Moore does not want that honest debate. Not unlike Hannity or Limbaugh, Moore has deemed his political quest as being more important than the ethics surrounding his methodology. I will spare you with a list of examples and give you just one that should seal the deal.

Moore met with Roger Smith. He interviewed him twice and Smith answered his questions in a seemingly respectful manner. Not only that, but his mic wasn't cut at the board meeting. This was all covered in a recent documentary, made by two Canadians that sought to do a biopic on Moore.

Manufacturing Dissent. That's the name of the film. It's not an attack film, but they did up discussing the many issues surrounding Moore's ethics. I think every Moore fan owes it to themself to see this movie. Don't trust me. See the film.

"Roger and Me" launched Moore's career. To think that the movie was essentially based on a lie...well, it makes me sick. Maybe Moore decided that having Roger answer his questions didn't provide the kind of ending he wanted. Maybe Moore's arguements were neutered by Roger's answers. Who knows. I sure would like to see that footage though.

I can't, in good conscience, rail against the right wing manipulation machine and let Moore go unchecked. I hope that someday "liberal" will be synonymous with honesty. We need to be scientific in the way we present and fight for our ideals. That's the only way victory can actually occur. We have to win because our ideas are better.

[–] comolaflores 16 years ago

I too think that Moore is rather manipulative and plays fast-and-loose with the truth. And it's unfortunate, because unlike at the time of Roger & Me, he now has a tremendous amount of influence and for many people his are the only documentaries they will ever see. I think his movies have far too much of allowing him, and his viewers, to feel superior to the poor yokels he puts on camera, rather than actually getting at the truth or finding anything to look to.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] nicolastoutant 16 years ago

I don't care about all this, Moore represents moderate left-wing, and even tough I love Moore and his films, I still am a radical left-winger

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Aberrmen 16 years ago

He owes it to the argument to show those "daft things arrogant people say" in their own defense. If what they say is really so idiotic it would only bolster Moore's argument and he would have every reason in the world to show it. I am a liberal and think that Moore makes several good points in his films. I also think, however, that he screws his own credibility by manipulating certain facts and quotes in ways to feed his own argument when in actuality all he is doing is giving dissenters an excuse to discredit his ENTIRE argument. When someone manipulates facts so they lose their punch or just simply omits one side of an argument as Moore seemingly did in Roger and Me he isn't making a documentary, he's making propaganda.

[–] Gwasgray 15 years ago

So you think it was right of GM to pull out of Michigan and go to a foreign for some cheap labour? You could say Roger & Me is a bit one-sided but how did the sitaution have positive sides to it?