As we have stated previously in class, documentaries allow people to artistically express their opinions on a certain subject. Michael Moore may have portrayed Bush in a way that might seem offensive or unfair but he was just presenting his thoughts on the subject. If someone chooses to eat up his point of view, then it's their fault for not being able to think on their own. Michael Moore just offers a view and hopes that people will agree with it. I think that he was completely justified in showing how Bush reacted after he was told that the Trade Center had been hit. The Onions Scott Tobias said that said that it would be hard to process the news before knowing the actual magnitude of the event. And I completely agree. But as president, don't you think Bush should had investigated a little more to discover the extent of damage? I would hope so. Instead of finding this out, he let the minutes pass on by while reading to children. I don't think that Michael Moore was unfair at all. He just shared his point of view with the public.
-Hannah Knechtel
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Ooooops. I didn't put a title. Ooops.
ReplyDeleteWhile I do agree with you about Moore having the right to express his opinion, he should have better taste than to present slanderous opinions to the masses. Even though I am thoroughly against the way in which 9/11, Afghanistan, and Iraq were portrayed and handled, I have respect for President Bush and I in no way believe that he was looking to do harm at any point. I guess it just bothers me that Moore's view is so oft taken as respectable, even when it's incredible bias is never hidden and makes for an entirely slanted film.
ReplyDelete* PS If you want to add a title, you can edit any old post from here: http://www.blogger.com/home
if you just click on the "Edit Post" link.
This continues an interesting question: let's assume for the moment that Bush is evil, and/ or dumb: does this mean the filmmaker (Moore) no longer has the responsibility to give his subject(s) the benefit of the doubt, or a charitable interpretation? After all, if the filmmaker is right about his beliefs, shouldn't it come out on its own, without the help of funny music or shots 'out of context', as we say? (NB: I don't meant to take this position on Bush *or* Moore, but it's a relevant question as to the filmmaker's responsibilities.)
ReplyDeleteOn behalf of Shannon:
ReplyDelete'As I think Bush’s reaction was understandable, I agree that he should have found out more information from the service men who initially told him. But he had to know that people were already working to save the lives of those in the buildings.'