Documentary?

[Attalus]

I thought "Boweling For Columbine" was a much more accurate description of the thing. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[Davros]

Originally posted by Attalus: I thought "Boweling For Columbine" was a much more accurate description of the thing. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Now there's a surprise [img]smile.gif[/img] - who wouldda thunk it

[Iron_Ranger]

You know Davros, for someone who dislikes Fox so much, you sure do bring it up in alot of posts.

[Davros]

Originally posted by Iron_Ranger: You know Davros, for someone who dislikes Fox so much, you sure do bring it up in alot of posts.

Nice try again IR [img]smile.gif[/img] , but maybe it was really MagiK that bought it up first - see below for his highly accurate and praiseworthy description of what journalists are supposed to be doing [img]smile.gif[/img]

Posted by MagiK Chewie..it is called an "Editorial". Or possibly a "Commentary". Documentry's are supposed to be straight up factual reporting..sort of what Journalists were supposed to be doing before they decided their main goal was to effect change and not report.

See - my points in the FOX debate must be reaching the target audience [img]smile.gif[/img]
QED.

[ 05-14-2003, 05:28 AM: Message edited by: Davros ]

[Iron_Ranger]

Yeah, like Fox is the first and only news outlet that does that.

They all do that.

A bit of information here. The much hated 'right-wing' Bill O'Reilly first job at a major news corp? Yep, the utterly fair and balanced CNN!

[Davros]

LOL - so do I take it you are advocating the view that "we (FOX) should be bad cos the others are bad too" argument. While it has a cerian eloquent perspecacity, that argumnt fails to engender the necessary improvement because it dismisses the existance (and persistance) of the problem.

Always nice to debate the issue with you though - must dash at the moment though - it's time to get all hot and sweaty down at the gym.

I'm offski [img]smile.gif[/img] - toodle pip and all that.

[Iron_Ranger]

Originally posted by Davros: LOL - so do I take it you are advocating the view that "we (FOX) should be bad cos the others are bad too" argument. While it has a cerian eloquent perspecacity, that argumnt fails to engender the necessary improvement because it dismisses the existance (and persistance) of the problem. Always nice to debate the issue with you though - must dash at the moment though - it's time to get all hot and sweaty down at the gym. I'm offski [img]smile.gif[/img] - toodle pip and all that.

No, what I am saying is that if all the news outlets spin, Fox shouldnt get all the blame. And they get bashed much,much more than anything else.

Another interesting fact-

Shepherd Smith was voted 2nd most trusted reporter (Reporter? On Fox? Naah) in America. Behind Tom Brokaw surprisingly.

Hope you dont mind us hijacking your thread MagiK.

[Davros]

All news outlets spin do they? Well some spin a little and some spin like a top. Why play with the dull drab toys when the biggest and best is a bright shiny whirligig with big flashing lights screaming out "pick me".

You're right though, we are getting off topic. The topic was the best documentary award I believe. Well the award will probably help pick up the sales of the DVD - once it finally gets released here that is. It has quite piqued my interest [img]smile.gif[/img] .

Originally posted by Davros: There's life Jim, but not as we know it. [img]smile.gif[/img] Opinionated documentary is hardly new to the world, but in Micheal Moore's case it is anti gun opinion that is presented and that is indeed a crime. I imagine that there would be people in the world equally nonplussed if Penn and Teller had won the award, or if FOX had won an award for objective news presentation. Sooooo rather than discuss my question you attack my post...instead of offering something useful to me, you just decide to snipe. Thanks a pant load guy. I am awaiting the DVD release myself, so I can see what you guys object to so much. I have read the debunk, and more significantly the debunk of the debunk . It has not been debunked that MM did in fact exagerate, falsify and at times fabricate parts of his film. But hey that was not my question BTW MagiK - was the spelling mistake in your original thread an intentional slur on the movie or serendiptical subtitle? I love how it occurred after the (sp) on a persons name which is both short and reasonably well known (even if it is more like infamy in the pro gun right wing circles). Again, rather than answer my question you just snipe at me, takeing pot shots. I thought we could move beyond spelling errors and typo's. Apparently not you. If you read my post you might notice that I could give a shit about the movie's content..but want to know "what constitutes a documentry. Are editorials documentrys? are commentary's documentrys? How do the awards judges decide? Can't wait to see what all this fuss is about [img]smile.gif[/img] It appears to be about you wanting to bust my chops for asking a question, but completely ignoring what I asked....but that is just how it appears to me...perhaps Im not enlightened enough to communicate with such a sublime personage as yourself.

Originally posted by Grojlach: quote: Originally posted by Iron_Ranger: Yeah, I have asked that question several times, actaully had a link that completly debunked his flim. I wonder if I can find it again.

I believe someone had already debunked most of that debunktion as well, as being even more biased than Bowling for Columbine was... Oh well. I suppose that if you yell loud enough, you could bend a simple neutral fact both to the left and to the right. The truth is always somewhere in the middle. [img]smile.gif[/img]
Bowling for Columbine is an entertaining and interesting watch, though. We're gonna show it during the Cultural Festival at our University next week as well. [/QUOTE]While Im sure you are quite knowledgable about what whent down in columbine and all....that is not what Im asking...could we get back on topic please? Im asking about how Documentry is defined, what seperates (if anything) documentry, commentary and editorials....do you have any insight into these questions? That is what the thread is about not the content of MM's movie.