PROOF! Bart Sibrel makes worse Documentaries than Michael Moore.
I just finished watching "Astronauts Gone Wild", a "documentary" made to supposedly "prove" that the moon landings were a hoax.
The very first thing that makes this a bad "documentary," is the same thing which make Michael Moore a poor documentary filmmaker. I think Michael Moore films work as comedies, and as film-essay, but they hold no water as documentaries. Rather than seeking to answer a questions, a film-essay filters information to prove a point. Not to say that documentaries can't prove a point... but there's a significant difference between asking a question like:
"Why are things fucked?" and reaching an answer through exploring the possibilities one can reasonably think of to answer that
than there is by having a pre-drawn conclusion like:
"Things are fucked because of ALIENS shitting up the works." and only exploring the options which lead to that end.
Film-essay is a better medium for propagandists because no other argument is given fair weight, and often the only look into various points of view show them out of context and weaker than they may actually be. There is no regard for actually compelling people to discuss an issue, there is only a focus on getting people to agree on the same thing in the end. Michael Moore makes superb film-essays, but because he bills them as documentaries he looses all credibility. This film on the other hand, is not a very good film-essay. Infact, I began to feel sorry for the astronauts. It's really a cringe worthy piece. The point at which Buzz Aldren punches the director in the face for chasing him and calling him names is by far the highlight of the whole film. You can see a clip of some of that sequence on his online store. It's notable that they cut a good portion of harassment out of the scene itself. They also cut the sound off where the director calls Buzz Aldren a liar and a coward (which finally earned him the punch in the face). The irrefutable evidence the director provides is highly questionable. He would throw out things like "I have a CLASSIFIED tape of YOU FAKING footage of the trip to the moon...what do you think about THAT??!!" And the tape itself is kind of ambiguous. There could be quite a bit of things explaining the silhouette in-front of the window as the camera was not right against the glass. A fair question might have been "What was going on at this point in the mission?" although I'd doubt the astronauts would remember a non-historic out take of a god damn window decades ago. If I were there, I can think of several things I might be more interested in. The point is that the astronauts are guilty until they prove their case to the director, who is utterly retarded.
If somebody is making a film questioning the moral fiber of it's nations "heroes," you would figure some attempt at legitimacy and good faith would be maintained by the director as to not come off like some sort of ignorant hypocrite. I suppose Bart Sibrel feels that since he's decided that some people are frauds and , that gives him the right to be one too. Ambushes and interviewing under false pretense are scumbag tactics. It's further aggravating that he refuses to leave the people alone when they tell him to fuck off, and instead shove a bible in their face.
"SWEAR on this BIBLE under penalty of Perjury, Eternal Damnation, and TREASON that you walked on the MOON!!!!" Whoever chases people around this way doesn't not deserve compliance, they deserve to be beaten with that bible until they're in a coma or better. "Six astronauts REFUSED to swear on this bible, PROOF that the moon landing was a HOAX!!!!" Bullshit! Ever think that it might be great supporting evidence to the theory that you're an obnoxious fuck???
At no point does this film really give any convincing testimony to the directors "truth." Some conspiracy theory is touched upon, but is inadequately explained to be either compelling or very interesting. Probably the only reason to watch this is to see how much you end up hating the director by the end. You stop caring about what the people are talking about, and just watch a maniac annoy and provoke senior citizens... which is mildly entertaining I suppose.
The very first thing that makes this a bad "documentary," is the same thing which make Michael Moore a poor documentary filmmaker. I think Michael Moore films work as comedies, and as film-essay, but they hold no water as documentaries. Rather than seeking to answer a questions, a film-essay filters information to prove a point. Not to say that documentaries can't prove a point... but there's a significant difference between asking a question like:
"Why are things fucked?" and reaching an answer through exploring the possibilities one can reasonably think of to answer that
than there is by having a pre-drawn conclusion like:
"Things are fucked because of ALIENS shitting up the works." and only exploring the options which lead to that end.
Film-essay is a better medium for propagandists because no other argument is given fair weight, and often the only look into various points of view show them out of context and weaker than they may actually be. There is no regard for actually compelling people to discuss an issue, there is only a focus on getting people to agree on the same thing in the end. Michael Moore makes superb film-essays, but because he bills them as documentaries he looses all credibility. This film on the other hand, is not a very good film-essay. Infact, I began to feel sorry for the astronauts. It's really a cringe worthy piece. The point at which Buzz Aldren punches the director in the face for chasing him and calling him names is by far the highlight of the whole film. You can see a clip of some of that sequence on his online store. It's notable that they cut a good portion of harassment out of the scene itself. They also cut the sound off where the director calls Buzz Aldren a liar and a coward (which finally earned him the punch in the face). The irrefutable evidence the director provides is highly questionable. He would throw out things like "I have a CLASSIFIED tape of YOU FAKING footage of the trip to the moon...what do you think about THAT??!!" And the tape itself is kind of ambiguous. There could be quite a bit of things explaining the silhouette in-front of the window as the camera was not right against the glass. A fair question might have been "What was going on at this point in the mission?" although I'd doubt the astronauts would remember a non-historic out take of a god damn window decades ago. If I were there, I can think of several things I might be more interested in. The point is that the astronauts are guilty until they prove their case to the director, who is utterly retarded.
If somebody is making a film questioning the moral fiber of it's nations "heroes," you would figure some attempt at legitimacy and good faith would be maintained by the director as to not come off like some sort of ignorant hypocrite. I suppose Bart Sibrel feels that since he's decided that some people are frauds and , that gives him the right to be one too. Ambushes and interviewing under false pretense are scumbag tactics. It's further aggravating that he refuses to leave the people alone when they tell him to fuck off, and instead shove a bible in their face.
"SWEAR on this BIBLE under penalty of Perjury, Eternal Damnation, and TREASON that you walked on the MOON!!!!" Whoever chases people around this way doesn't not deserve compliance, they deserve to be beaten with that bible until they're in a coma or better. "Six astronauts REFUSED to swear on this bible, PROOF that the moon landing was a HOAX!!!!" Bullshit! Ever think that it might be great supporting evidence to the theory that you're an obnoxious fuck???
At no point does this film really give any convincing testimony to the directors "truth." Some conspiracy theory is touched upon, but is inadequately explained to be either compelling or very interesting. Probably the only reason to watch this is to see how much you end up hating the director by the end. You stop caring about what the people are talking about, and just watch a maniac annoy and provoke senior citizens... which is mildly entertaining I suppose.
posted by Drogulus at 1:32 AM
2 Comments:
As a Michael Moore fan, I really enjoy your definition and discussion of film-essays vs. documentaries. I've always felt that Moore is better at being entertaining than being objective, but I've never considered that the issue was perhaps a misclassification. Sibrel's documentary sounds entertaining for all the wrong reasons. I'll have to check it out.
Good rant.
Post a Comment
<< Home