(lst_pst3) Michael Moore's Slacker Uprising

Written months ago. A wee bit rude frankly. Michael Moore-ish about Michael Moore. Anyway, not letting it lying around.

Micheal Moore is fat and ugly as is his new so-called documentary. Yes, that is a stupid ad-hominem attack, but stupid ad-hominem attacks should be morally justified on stupid people who survive on stupid ad-hominem attacks and double cheese burgers. Full disclosure - I loove double cheese burgers and I too tip the scale a bit nowadays.

It can be argued that there still exists one reason you should still watch his newest exercise in pomposity, Slacker Uprising. About 110 minutes into it, a breathtakingly pretty 67-year old woman - Joan Baez, sings the beautiful national anthem of Finland. Maan, Steve Jobs has incredible taste, not just in technology. Wink, wink.

Michael Moore calls himself a filmmaker. Hey, he's an Oscar winner dammit. But he completely lacks something any good artist should have - integrity and intelligence.

Okay, two things.

Slacker Uprising is a 'documentary' about a 'documentary'.  The documentary inside the doc is Fahrenheit 9/11 which he had made in 2004.

In Fahrenheit 9/11 there is a remarkable scene - Neo Con Iraq War architect Paul Wolfowitz is standing before a camera, ready to go on air. He suddenly realizes he can look a bit cooler. He produces a comb from somewhere, wets it by giving it a good slurpy lick and then combs what remains of his hair. Moore took this bit of video and made it a part of his film.

Yes, it was as grotesque as it sounds.

First of all, in Wolfowitz's defense, saliva is perhaps the only bodily fluid he could produce in such short notice. Even if he could produce any other fluid, perhaps saliva is also the cleaner one. But all of that is a hygiene issue that should be a concern only to Mr. Wolfowitz's wife.

Showing something like this (and this is just one grotesque example) is not just something which shows poor taste. By showing this Moore did a most despicable violation of artistic integrity.

If you are going to do a polemic and critique of someone's politics, it is NOT fair game to take an out of context and inconsequential thing like this and use it to pander and slander and mock and then expect to be taken seriously.

Moore carries on in the same vein in this documentary about that documentary. While the documentary lacked more in the integrity department/requirement the documentary about the documentary is shockingly lacking in intelligence.

The whole content of the document can be surmised as 'Michael Moore the great hero fights for the pussy democrats against the evil republicans. People love him, people loooooooooovvvvve him. And he is winning; he is changing the tide on George W. Bush, almost single-handedly. Did I say people love him... hey, he even declines to sign on the boobies of a chick who pleads with hero Michael to do it.

After an hour plus of the same thing the hero Michael fails but not unheroically. He managed to make the pussy Kerry win in all the 68 places he goes to and among the slackers who are his audience. Phew if not for him...

Well, there is a law of human nature which can be stated thus - you are 'liberal' about your girlfriend but you are conservative about your daughter ie you want your girlfriend to 'fool around' with you but the same you will later want to cut the balls off any guy who will fool around with your daughter. Michael Moore's politics or his intelligence is not sophisticated enough to understand something as nuanced as this.

For Moore, everything is a conspiracy against his 'team' who is always right. It is sad in its own way.

He should read Jefferson.

Anyway here is the short analysis.

Pretty women who can sing beautifully are good. Middle aged, ugly, pompous men are bad.
Or
not worth the bandwidth required to download it.