I don't know if he's ever won an Oscar, but he sure has done a shitload of fictional films.
there's a difference between Stone and Moore. Stone makes stories for entertainment. Moore passes lies off as truth.
Stone passed of lies as truth in JFK
thats different. JFK wasn't a documentary. It was a film for entertainment. Stone wasn't lying, and he never claimed he was telling the truth.
Besides, I don't understand why we're arguing about this, unless you're trying to defend Moore in some backwards way.
Quote:I liked the part of Bowling for Columbine when Michael Moore just made shit up and edited things to his point of view.
i don't think its possibly to make any movie without having a point of view. its nearly impossible to be totally impartial.
Of course you can never truely be impartial, but that's not even the problem here. HE ACTUALLY MADE SHIT UP AND PASSED IT OFF AS FACT. There's a difference between favoring one point of view, and making up facts and editing the truth to make it seem like your point of view is right.
Here.
how do you really feel about the NRA?
the question holds no relevence to this discussion.
do i need to start a new topic?
nah, just say that Michael Moore is a liar who should not have been given the Oscar.
he's a liar, which is why he should win the oscar. hollywood is full of em.
Astounding logic, buddy. Keep it up, you win all arguements with stuff like that.
the oscars are bullshit anyway. look at the crappy movies they give awards to.
clearly moore editorialized when he was not supposed to, its far from a documentary except in the fact it consists of unscripted (mostly) footage.
furthermore, i dont think we were arguing, unless you think that the oscars are anything more than a marketing device created by hollywood, for hollywood.
so just fucking say you hate moore like the rest of them!
oh i dont hate him, i think he's brilliant!
what exactly did he lie about in the documenarty?