MovieChat Forums > Biggie and Tupac (2002) Discussion > Response to Ghost Dog Emcee's comments

Response to Ghost Dog Emcee's comments

posted 20 years ago by eeman69
2 replies | jump to latest

This is the comment that I read on this film:

No doubt alot of new info is being exposed in this documentary...

However the movie it'self is pretty much a sloppy mess and it seems that the boys in the editing-booth forgot to erase plenty of bad stuff in the movie ,for example: They interview a women who had a thing with one of the corrupt police's about they're sexual preference, Nick gets a listen of unreleased Pac-songs while a helicopter (chopper) is flying right above theire heads so u don't actually hear anything, u get to see Nick trying to get interviews from different people but when he doesn't get them AND STUFF LIKE THAT

In the movie NICK BROOMFIELD tries to be the new MIKE MOORE appearing in front of the camera and giving comments, He's not anything close to MIKE MOORE... he even looks scared at times while doing an interview with Tupac's cousin MOPREME and walking in BIGGIE's hood.

The best moments is when something is actually said and they are not running around trying to get interviews or while having an interview-section asking about sex.

Suge Knight is in the movie, but he only talks about staying positive for the children and how much he dislikes drug-dealers...

6/10 stars

AND This is my response:

In response to Ghost-Dog-Emcee's comments on Nick Broomfield's "Biggie and Tupac":

Michael Moore was not the first filmmaker to use the participatory mode of documentary. Broomfield is not trying to copy Moore just because he is engaged with the subjects in the film. This style of documentary goes back much further than Moore's "Roger and Me" and has been utilized by countless filmmakers in countless variations. As well, Broomfield first made a documentary in this style named "Driving Me Crazy" in 1988. Broomfield and his producer where participants in the film to try and make sense of a senseless situation. Moore's "Roger and Me" was released in 1989.

Moore's last two films have been quite popular. Because of this many people seem to think that he is a pioneer in documentary filmmaking. I personally enjoy his films but because he is, as you put it, "in front of the camera" he is able to ask leading questions, probe people into saying things that can be taken out of context and edited later and encourage insincere comments.

All documentary films should be taken with a grain of salt, as should all forms of media. You cannot believe something because you saw it in a film or on television. Making a documentary is much like writing an essay. In both mediums it is the author's job to provide a thesis statement and back it up. It is the role of the viewer to make up their own mind.

Please don't misunderstand me; I am a big fan of Michael Moore's films. However I read your comments and feel your logic is flawed. You make the comment, "Nick Broomfield tries to be the new Michael Moore" when Broomfield's filmmaking skills parallel Moore's. Both filmmakers are unique in their styles; they each present information in their own way.

[–] mentalcase402 18 years ago

The scenes this Ghost Dog Emcee pointed out (the woman who was bangin the cops and the helicopter scene) aren't BAD scenes. The woman was a key element in showing how twisted these so called cops were and to paint them as they were...pigs. The helicopter scene was a little different but I think it was just to prove how protective people were of Pac and his music to where Broomfield was offering money for them and still getting turned down.

And of course he was scared. Mopreme, as cool as he was, was an intimidating figure it seemed. He seemed uncomfortable and when the person you're interviewing is uncomfortable it tends to make some interviewers the same way. That doesn't mean there's something wrong. Broomfield was trying to get close to the story, but was hesitant simply because he's a British white dude with a camera in the ghetto. DUH! Basically I thought it was a great film and a big eye opener about the murders.

[–] Seth_Rogue_One 8 years ago

Whoa lol, my first username lives on even though the account is gone

I was Ghost Dog Emcee and I did indeed right that review, although I do agree with it still I have raised the rating to a 7 because as a work of entertainment it is still entertaining (even though alot have been manipulated to make it work with Broomfield's theory pointing the fingers at Suge, one of I and most other people have completely think to be false at this stage).

You do make alot of good points though  and yeah Broomfield and Moore is a big reason why I always take documentaries with a grain of salt

A good father and a good outlaw can't settle inside the same man.