I've often wished that Errol Morris -- a much more subtle and intelligent documentarian -- had done a documentary on Bush, rather than Moore.

There's a lot to scream about the current administration. The facts are bad enough.... the overly emotional tone of the movie simply makes Moore look manipulative.

I think I've figured out that we have different takes on F9/11 :) , so I won't belabor this.

My thoughts are much more with dreago, who posts here in that Ginmar thread.

I'm particularly puzzled, saddened even, by Ginmar and others thinking Moore doesn't consider soldiers as individuals, because one of the things that movie particularly brought home to me was that the soldiers in Iraq are everyday young men and women like the ones I meet in the Sequoia Station shopping center, making the best of a bad business. ...Guess I ought to post that in response directly to her as well.

As for wishing Errol Morris would have made the documentary -- I adore Morris, and think his recent MacNamara documentary completely deserved its Oscar. But he's the wrong person for a mass-market documentary, exactly because he's so "cool" (read: non-overtly emotional) and fact-oriented.

Thanks for unwrapping your response; the opened-up (what, Firecat-cut? now I'm trying to transfer LJ jargon into real life) version clarifies things considerably.

MM would be totally with you about wanting the movie to spark discussion, whether it agreed with him or not.

As I guess I want to include in my Ginmar comment, I don't see how anyone could have expected him to portray the entire range of soldiers. It wasn't what he was trying to film in the first place. Now, a movie based on Ginmar's posts, that would come closer to portraying the soldiers' world. I would pay serious money to see that movie.