I will watch your favorite political documentary/movie.

[BowlenBall]

The best political documentary I've ever seen is The War Room, about the Clinton 1992 presidential campaign. If you loved Clinton, you'll find a lot to like here. If you hated Clinton... you'll also find a lot to like here. Either way, it gives unparalleled access to what happens behind-the-scenes during a presidential campaign.



Watch it, and tell me how many of these you'll give it:

[Blart]

Originally Posted by baja

Anyone that does not believe evil is working on this earth needs to watch this film.


Evil before your eyes, undeniable evil.

What else could it be?

Some will say what we have here is stupid, plain and simple..

Stupid that profound has evil as it's puppeteer.


Thanks for the link. Powerful stuff.

I don't know about evil. After watching everything so far, I've noticed a trend: confidence & incompetence (which was the theme of Religulous). Those two traits appear to be a recipe for success in large organizations, whether it's Enron or the Pentagon.

[baja]

http://youtu.be/lEV5AFFcZ-s

[baja]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iE-H_...feature=relmfu

Both links are very much political.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Originally Posted by Blart

I don't know about evil. After watching everything so far, I've noticed a trend: confidence & incompetence (which was the theme of Religulous). Those two traits appear to be a recipe for success in large organizations, whether it's Enron or the Pentagon.

Or the GeeDubya misadministration (appointing a horse trainer as head of FEMA, etc.)

[Blart]

Originally Posted by Bacchus

Sicko is one of my favorites.

Ah, thank you. It's nice to have something funny and (relatively) light after watching the last two. I couldn't find it on any streaming sites, so I got it elsewhere. After all, it's cool with Moore,
"I'm just happy that people get to see my movies. I'm not a big supporter of the copyright laws in this country"

Moore's work is heavily criticized, not just by right-wing PACs (they were out to destroy his character in 2004 when he went after Dubya) but also by documentarians who dislike how he tampers with his subjects, and stages a few scenes (e.g. the bank-gun scene in Bowling for Columbine.) But I like his films, he's a great prankster when there's a point to be made, and is genuinely funny.

I didn't remember that Sicko isn't about the un-insured. Moore spends about 5 minutes on the working poor.

Sicko is about Americans who have health insurance, many with premium coverage, and how they're repeatedly screwed over and left to die, for profit. It made me feel much less secure with my own insurance.

The pranks aren't as shocking as other Moore films (Going to Guantanamo for healthcare sounds like a big awesome idea, but it's anticlimactic in reality) and the scenes in Cuba seemed rather forced - the 9/11 Heroes getting to finally see a doctor came off too sappy, Moore tried to make it seem so wonderful, but you know those ailments aren't going to be cured with one trip to a doctor.

The best scene is when the idea of being criticized in a Moore film scared one insurance company so much that it decided to pay for a little girl's cochlear implant.

When I say it's "relatively" light, I do mean relatively. There are scenes with very sick people who are in pain. One woman tells the story of when her husband was refused a bone marrow transplant (despite having premium health insurance) and he said he'd accept his own imminent death, but doesn't want to lose her or his daughter. Pretty rough. Death panels are already here, it turns out.

Moore's conversations with people in our fellow plutocratic nations of Canada and the UK are great, to hear them say how much they appreciate healthcare, and in the same breath admit they're conservatives. I've never had so much respect for conservatives before - except maybe Garcia here in the forums.

As far as MM films go, I still prefer Bowling for Columbine because the message was more subtle.







Now that more Americans will be dealing with insurance companies than ever, Sicko is more relevant than ever.

[Blart]

Originally Posted by GreasyQtip

I downloaded a brand new documentary last night I plan to watch tonight, It is called We are Legion it is about the hacker group Anonymous and although not directly along any party lines it will be fairly political I assume.

I'm really excited about We Are Legion, but am going to wait until the full movie is released in a couple weeks. The current leaked version is incomplete and lacking 5 or 6 interviews.

But yeah, hacktivism is very political. It's modern civil disobedience.

[Miss I.]

Originally Posted by Blart

Ah, thank you. It's nice to have something funny and (relatively) light after watching the last two. I couldn't find it on any streaming sites, so I got it elsewhere. After all, it's cool with Moore,
"I'm just happy that people get to see my movies. I'm not a big supporter of the copyright laws in this country"

Moore's work is heavily criticized, not just by right-wing PACs (they were out to destroy his character in 2004 when he went after Dubya) but also by documentarians who dislike how he tampers with his subjects, and stages a few scenes (e.g. the bank-gun scene in Bowling for Columbine.) But I like his films, he's a great prankster when there's a point to be made, and is genuinely funny.

I didn't remember that Sicko isn't about the un-insured. Moore spends about 5 minutes on the working poor.

Sicko is about Americans who have health insurance, many with premium coverage, and how they're repeatedly screwed over and left to die, for profit. It made me feel much less secure with my own insurance.

The pranks aren't as shocking as other Moore films (Going to Guantanamo for healthcare sounds like a big awesome idea, but it's anticlimactic in reality) and the scenes in Cuba seemed rather forced - the 9/11 Heroes getting to finally see a doctor came off too sappy, Moore tried to make it seem so wonderful, but you know those ailments aren't going to be cured with one trip to a doctor.

The best scene is when the idea of being criticized in a Moore film scared one insurance company so much that it decided to pay for a little girl's cochlear implant.

When I say it's "relatively" light, I do mean relatively. There are scenes with very sick people who are in pain. One woman tells the story of when her husband was refused a bone marrow transplant (despite having premium health insurance) and he said he'd accept his own imminent death, but doesn't want to lose her or his daughter. Pretty rough. Death panels are already here, it turns out.

Moore's conversations with people in our fellow plutocratic nations of Canada and the UK are great, to hear them say how much they appreciate healthcare, and in the same breath admit they're conservatives. I've never had so much respect for conservatives before - except maybe Garcia here in the forums.

As far as MM films go, I still prefer Bowling for Columbine because the message was more subtle.







Now that more Americans will be dealing with insurance companies than ever, Sicko is more relevant than ever.

I like Moore, but I don't see him as pure documentarian, which isn't necessarily bad, but I would put him closer to Jon Stewart than making straight out documentaries. Though to be fair, most documentaries have an angle despite pretenses to be simple "documenting" events, etc. They are all commentary, but i do see the point about the amount of staging in Moore's work. I enjoy it, it makes me think about topical items, but it seems more like commentary in the way that Jon Stewart is comedy based in news. It takes a topic and uses humor to illuminate perspectives. Nothing wrong with it, but it tends to, IMO, stretch beyond being documentary.

[spdirty]

Just watched 2016. It's on DVD/Blue Ray/Pay Per View now. Highly recommend it.

[Blart]

Originally Posted by Popcorn Sutton

http://www.thecartelmovie.com/

The film plays like a local New Jersey 10pm news story, complete with the low budget and annoying narrator. Bob Bowdon, the director, is not afraid to show his bias. He often talks over interviewees who don't share his point of view, as in the scenes with the school director. And I have no problem with bias and brashness - but it needs some style or humor to make it tolerable.

Early on he brings up the efficiency of Maryland's public schools (attributing it to more teachers, less administration) compared to the inefficient, over-administrated New Jersey schools, but never looks to reform the NJ school system. Instead, the rest of the film is spent supporting charter schools in New Jersey, and focusing entirely on New Jersey school issues and supposing they're the best for the entire country, without looking for alternative solutions elsewhere - how did he forget Maryland so quickly?

The most powerful scenes are the lotteries, where desperate mothers and children look for a way out of their horrible schools. As the USA becomes more and more a winner-take-all society, eduction is paramount to avoiding a life of sickness and poverty. The tears and frustration show how much our Country's poor are aware of opportunity, and if you grew up going to a nice school district - this film will make you realize how privileged you are.

Waiting For Superman does all of the pro-charter arguments, and lottery scenes, with much more grace and subtlety. The Cartel thinks you're an idiot, explains the same idea to you several times (with crudely drawn cartoons) and then hits you over the head with emotion and angry narration one last time for good measure, while being completely devoid of humor, interesting music, or production values that offer much beyond a talking head.

As for the central argument of the film, that Charter schools > Public schools, if it's true - fine. Our public education system needs serious reform. If privatizing is the answer, let's do it! We need an educated workforce, we need to give our poorest some real opportunity.

However, according the latest Stanford study, as well as the mediocre/bad performance of Charter Schools in New Orleans and North Carolina, Charters don't appear to be the answer. I'd love to see a film that looks for solutions beyond our borders.

[Blart]

Originally Posted by spdirty

Just watched 2016. It's on DVD/Blue Ray/Pay Per View now. Highly recommend it.

(I'm jumping ahead here because I already reviewed 2016 from another thread, this is a copy of my post)

2016: Obama's America

The movie starts off with a contemplative Dinesh D'Souza talking about Dinesh D'Souza and comparing Dinesh D'Souza to the president. For example, they both have dads. They both have distant relatives that aren't in the USA. They both have dark skin. Therefore, Dinesh understands Obama.

From there, some disproven Republican talking points are stated as fact (i.e. that the tar sands pipeline would create tens of thousands of jobs) and he asks why, WHY IS OBAMA HOLDING BACK AMERICA?

Dinesh figures it all out by talking to distant relatives and right-wing ideologues. The "facts" end here, and everything that comes next is amateur psychoanalysis, conspiracy, and paranoia.

Spoiler alert: Barack isn't Barack. He's his dad. And this Barack-Dad hybrid is a pure commie, and wants all countries to be 3rd world countries, and hates America. You can tell because he dislikes imperialism and wants to reduce the amount of nuclear warheads. That's right - Obama is against nukes. Therefore, Obama became president in order to bring the USA down to the level of a third world country. He done tricked us!

This sounds crazy, but I'm not making it up: "Obama wants us to be a 3rd world country" really is the entire thesis behind the movie, almost word for word stated by Dinesh.

There are some small redeeming parts to this film, as Dinesh does go out of his way to find Obama's distant relatives from his father's side (and only his father's side - mothers don't count.) He goes to some interesting locales and talks with some truly interesting people, though he's quite leading with his questions. Basically I'm giving this an extra smoking cutler because he actually went to Africa.

Dinesh made this movie to appeal to imperialist Neocons, such as Ann Coulter. (edit: when I originally wrote this, I had no idea they once dated. Creepy!) This is not a movie that will win the hearts of small-government, anti-war libertarian types. It will not convert a single liberal or fence-sitter. It's simply masturbation fodder for the war-loving nationalist.

I'd honestly prefer the peace-loving Obama portrayed in this documentary to the war-loving, GTMO-supporting, drone-happy Obama we have now.

[razorwire77]

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/atwater/

Another Frontline recommendation. Boogie Man: The Lee Atwater Story.

[DomCasual]

Originally Posted by El Minion

This documentary made me have a meltdown, especially after it was shown that it directly helped recall Governor Grey Davis and put Schwarzenegger in his place through no fault of Davis or state regulators, among other things that royally pissed me off. Enron being caught on tape laughing at the "free market" manipulation of California energy prices that led directly to vulnerable citizens not getting their AC on during the sweltering summer months which led to several of their deaths. Artificial supply restrictions to boost demand prices in the name of ripping off the citizens of California. Fúck you Ken Lay, rot in hell ásshole!

Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room

A few things on this.

First (see bolded), I think I feel just as strongly about Skilling as I do Lay. They're both evil. Lay seemed to have a knack for recruiting evil, by design. Skilling was his best recruit.

The guy that bugged me the most, watching that film, was Fastow. He came across as A) the dumbest, and B) the most smug of the bunch. Watching his pitch to potential investors (with, of course, the benefit of hindsight), it's truly amazing no one called him out. There's a point where one of the bank reps says, "Well, it's hard to poke holes in what you're saying," or something to that effect. Fastow acts like a kid that just got away with cheating on a test - almost giddy. Throw in the fact that he's already out of prison, and it just stinks.

Last - and I am generally not a conspiracy theorist, at all - Lay's death seems convenient. (I haven't seen the film in awhile, and as I recall, I don't think Lay had "died" by the time it was released - this, therefore, is somewhat out of the scope of the film itself.) If there were ever ingredients for a conspiracy, this would seem to have them all. The number of people that would need to be involved would seem to be fairly low. The motive is extraordinarily high. The resources to pay the few who would need to be involved are plentiful. It makes you think.

[Blart]

Originally Posted by Arkie

The Money Masters (1996)

This was the worst documentary I've ever seen. 3 and a half ****ing hours - it made me regret making this thread. I wasn't even able to enjoy it ironically, like "I Want Your Money" which features an elderly, 3D Ronald Reagan beating the crap out of Obama.

Here are the main issues against my enjoyment:

• There's no production value, no creativity in the scenes.
  
• There's no music.
  
• There is one, skinny-faced man talking at you for 3 and 1/2 hours.

To make things worse, it seems the film was either researched from conspiracy newsgroups in the 1990's, or it was all a delusional dream from the filmmaker.

The thesis reminds me of Scientology. Like Dianetics, there are bits of truth scattered about to suck you in - for example, the Federal Reserve isn't a solely public institution. Moneyed people have power. Alright, keep going! Then it hits you with a whopper: the fed is 100% private and owned by the Illuminati (which they call the Money Masters), Fort Knox is empty, and this international evil cabal wants to create a "one world currency" to enslave us foreverrrr!!!!

As evidence for the more outlandish claims, the film features some hilariously bad quotes. For example,

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and the corporations which grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." - Thomas Jefferson
If you've read any Thomas Jefferson, or any writing from people in the early 19th century, this doesn't pass the smell test.
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thomas_...#Misattributed

"Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency: their sole object is gain." - Napoleon Bonaparte
WHAT?! Again, this doesn't even sound like Napoleon. It's actually from a book printed in the 30's.

"The Government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government and the buying power of consumers. The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of Government, but it is the Government's greatest creative opportunity. By the adoption of these principles ... the taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest. Money will cease to be master and become the servant of humanity." - Abraham Lincoln.
Again, not even close. This is from a book in the 1930's.

I could do more quotes, but you get the point. Every other one I looked up was entirely false or taken out of context.


A scholar reads first-hand sources. If they quote Napoleon or Thomas Jefferson, it's because they read Napoleon or Thomas Jefferson.

Nobody involved with this film was a scholar.

"The Money Masters sucked ballz." - Benjamin Franklin

[BowlenBall]

Originally Posted by Blart

This was the worst documentary I've ever seen. 3 and a half ****ing hours - it made me regret making this thread.

And THIS is what makes this OM thread one of my favorite of all time!

Rep to you, sir!

[Arkie]

Originally Posted by Blart

This was the worst documentary I've ever seen. 3 and a half ****ing hours - it made me regret making this thread. I wasn't even able to enjoy it ironically, like "I Want Your Money" which features an elderly, 3D Ronald Reagan beating the crap out of Obama.

Here are the main issues against my enjoyment:

• There's no production value, no creativity in the scenes.
  
• There's no music.
  
• There is one, skinny-faced man talking at you for 3 and 1/2 hours.

To make things worse, it seems the film was either researched from conspiracy newsgroups in the 1990's, or it was all a delusional dream from the filmmaker.

The thesis reminds me of Scientology. Like Dianetics, there are bits of truth scattered about to suck you in - for example, the Federal Reserve isn't a solely public institution. Moneyed people have power. Alright, keep going! Then it hits you with a whopper: the fed is 100% private and owned by the Illuminati (which they call the Money Masters), Fort Knox is empty, and this international evil cabal wants to create a "one world currency" to enslave us foreverrrr!!!!

As evidence for the more outlandish claims, the film features some hilariously bad quotes. For example,

"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and the corporations which grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." - Thomas Jefferson
If you've read any Thomas Jefferson, or any writing from people in the early 19th century, this doesn't pass the smell test.
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thomas_...#Misattributed

"Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency: their sole object is gain." - Napoleon Bonaparte
WHAT?! Again, this doesn't even sound like Napoleon. It's actually from a book printed in the 30's.

"The Government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the Government and the buying power of consumers. The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of Government, but it is the Government's greatest creative opportunity. By the adoption of these principles ... the taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest. Money will cease to be master and become the servant of humanity." - Abraham Lincoln.
Again, not even close. This is from a book in the 1930's.

I could do more quotes, but you get the point. Every other one I looked up was entirely false or taken out of context.


A scholar reads first-hand sources. If they quote Napoleon or Thomas Jefferson, it's because they read Napoleon or Thomas Jefferson.

Nobody involved with this film was a scholar.

"The Money Masters sucked ballz." - Benjamin Franklin

It got a 9.4 from IMDb.

I agree the production value isn't the best, but the content is still accurate. It probably seemed even more outlandish when it was released in the booming 1990s. Since then, the skinny dude has stated: "I have kind of disassociated myself with The Money Masters, because the guy who actually controls the business side of it won't let me fix it. And there are about a dozen fake quotes in there." That would be 12 quotes out of hundreds. I bet you listed 3 of them.

[Blart]

Originally Posted by Arkie

I agree the production value isn't the best, but the content is still accurate.

Fort Knox is empty, based on what?
There is an international cabal of a few moneyed men, based on what?


The film didn't present anything to verify these claims... aside from quotes.

That would be 12 quotes out of hundreds. I bet you listed 3 of them.

12? I think that's more like the number of correct quotes. Seriously, Google them yourself.

Anyway, it wasn't the amount of false quotes (every famous-name quote I looked up was false) it was also the gross inaccuracy of them. Anyone who has read 3 pages of Jefferson, or anything from the 18th century, would know immediately that the quote is modern. Why trust them with your opinions about history?

Do something they've never done: read Jefferson's letters yourself.

It got a 9.4 from IMDb.

Something tells me this movie has a somewhat "niche" audience
I added my thoughts to imdb as well.

[DAN_BRONCO_FAN]

jay needs to lay off the Marlboro