the empire strikes back... and again... and again...

[rone]

Robert Jensen writes a great article in which he criticizes Michael Moore for, essentially, being a lazy blowhard who should have used his considerable talent and assets to make a more effective movie that takes American imperialism to task, which is pretty much what i've been saying for the last few weeks, except Jensen does fifty times a better job.

Comments

This seems to boil down to

[vardissakheli.livejournal.com]

"He should have made the movie I want to make." You and Jensen want a movie about how America screws the world. Moore made a movie about how Bush screws America, trampling some of the rest of the world in the process. They're two different stories with different motivations--interwoven, of course, but one doesn't make the other just go away. The story you want is about questions of fairness toward the rest of the world. Moore's work is about whether people's choices in the voting booth and (less in this film, but still present in things like the mention of Enron) the marketplace are even in line with their own self-interest.

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

You've got a great point. I still think Moore could have made his movie without his trademarked cheap shots and shenanigans... but i guess he's gotta be him.