MovieChat Forums > Roger & Me (1989) Discussion > No Oscar nomination

No Oscar nomination

posted 20 years ago by Martin_Sloan
13 replies | jump to latest

This documentary grossed over $6 million at the U.S. box office, earned great reviews, and it wasn't Oscar nominated?

A critic by the name of Pauline Kael exposed falsities in the film, and Moore lost a lawsuit over the film in 1993 (he did not appeal).

It is speculated that the former is why it wasn't nominated, and the latter is why it has never gotten a TV-release.

---
I'm bored. This sucks. Imbordisux.

[–] DerekZoolander 20 years ago

Maybe if he wasn’t so fat and stupid he would have been nominated.

maybe next year fat-a**

[–] anonymous_antihero 20 years ago

Somebody's a right-winger. Why don't you go ahead and blame his parents for neglecting to feed and educate him properly?

Calling him fat and stupid doesn't do anything for civil discourse. Even though I will say he's really piled it on as of Bowling For Columbine.

A lot of people, when they look into it, conclude that Moore does indeed seem to embellish his points and edit his films in a way that suggests dishonesty. I don't know if he's being dishonest. I know about Flint, I've been there, my girlfriend is from there, her mom works at GM, my dad works at GM, and the fact that GM totally screwed Flint is a pretty damn real happening. If you're going to pick apart Moore's credibility so that you can pretend his overall point- GM's and Roger Smith's greed totally wrecked an entire city- is invalid, go right ahead. Then take a drive through Flint.

[–] Martin_Sloan 20 years ago

Well said, DerekZoolander, well said:-)

[–] MagicBez 20 years ago

Does anyone know a working link for the Pauline Kael article? i'd be interested to have a read.

also DerekZoolander - you're a fool and have contributed nothing to anything.

and ivandronesund - don't encourage him.

[–] miguedroimdb 20 years ago

yeah

bush & friends rule

lets kill every non american who refuses 2 give their oil and then say they were terrorists

(yes..im being sarcastic)

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] videokillerprods 20 years ago

I'm not sure if it was Pauline Kael who picked apart Roger & Me, but the "expose" was published in a 1989 issue of Film Comment.
That article led the Oscar Documentary Committee to publicly brand Moore's tactics as "unethical" and deny R&M an Oscar nod.

[–] 404NotFound 20 years ago

Makes you wonder how many people are gonna have to publish "film comments" on BFC to get the Oscar Documentary Committee to have a look.

[–] lonmonster 20 years ago

I know it's irrelevant and trivial, and horribly closed minded, but Derek, that had me laughing for a while. Maybe I'm mildly retarded, who knows, but that was still funny.

[–] rusties 20 years ago

He even said he was shocked that bowling for columbine because few high grossing documentaries get oscar nominated.

Rust

[–] pjmharmon 20 years ago

someone asked for the Pauline Kael article earlier and here's a link for it:

http://backwithinterest.blogspot.com/2004/06/movie-love-apropos-of-friday-opening.html

Pauline Kael refers to Harlan Jacobson who wrote an article back in 1989 for Film Comment talking about the inaccuracies of "Roger and Me" which Michael Moore shucked off by claiming that General Motors gave $5,000,000 to the Lincoln Center which runs Film Comment and by insinuating that the 5 mill had something to do with the negative publicity (http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/_latimes-if_its_moore.htm). You decide who's right.

[–] Martin_Sloan 20 years ago

Well, Michael Moore was much nicer back then, he wasn't as wild and crazy about conspiracy theories and... hey, wait, that's right... there was no Bush back then.

Erm... wait a minute!