RichardR
Master Poster
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2001
- Messages
- 2,274
I know this film has been discussed before, but I thought it would be worthwhile to post a fairly detailed explanation of how Michael Moore deliberately misrepresented some actual events to support his agenda.
I came away from the movie with the strong image of the NRA as an aggressive, insensitive organization, holding pro-gun rallies just after the shootings at both Littleton and Flint. At the end of the movie, Charlton Heston is also shown as being evasive and even dishonest in his recollection of especially the Flint rally. However, I’m now convinced Moore deliberately and dishonestly misrepresented these two events to present a very different version from what actually transpired. I’ve checked many sources on this, and the following seems to be what happened.
Firstly, the Denver NRA rally was not held specifically because of the Columbine shooting, as the movie implied. In fact, it was the annual meeting of the NRA, planned a long time in advance and difficult to change. Furthermore, the NRA severely curtailed the meeting because of the shooting: it was originally a three day event, but after the Columbine shooting, the NRA canceled their gun show and banquet, and scaled back the meeting to one day only. The meeting that remained was the minimum required by statute. None if this is mentioned by Moore.
Secondly, the speech Heston is shown giving, is actually a mix of two speeches, namely the one given in Denver, and another given a year later in Charlotte. In addition, the Denver speech is aggressively edited to remove conciliatory references and to make it sound like Heston didn’t care about the shooting. Editing tricks cover the joins. The effect is to change the meaning of Heston’s speech.
Thirdly, the NRA rally in Flint, that Moore strongly and deliberately leads you to believe took place within 48 hours of the shooting, actually took place at an unrelated election rally eight months later. (One of many that Heston attended around this time.)
These three things, if represented honestly, would have completely changed the impression given of the NRA, and of how Heston was portrayed in his interview with Moore.
Look at these details, and references:
Firstly, read in the Denver local paper what Moore didn’t tell you, namely that this meeting was required by law, and that it had been significantly scaled back:
Having replaced the actual “a moment of silence” with a different year’s "From my cold dead hands!", Moore inserts a lengthy commentary as misdirection, and then cuts to the actual speech given in 1999. (He needs this lengthy misdirection because Heston is now wearing a different suit, shirt and tie.) Moore then heavily edits the 1999 speech to change its meaning. Here is the NRE transcript of Heston's May 1999 speech given in Denver, that I have also corroborated from independent sources.
I have quoted the whole speech. But I have put in bold and underlined, the extracts that Moore shows in his film. The other words are all omitted, See the conciliatory remarks that have been omitted. See if you think the meaning has been altered.
Following Denver, Moore moves on to Kayla Rolland, the little girl from Flint who was shot at her school, and whose picture Moore left at Heston’s home at the end of the movie. After covering the shooting, Moore momentarily displays a rostrum camera shot of a newspaper article, and quickly highlights and magnifies the words “within 48 hours”, and simultaneously comments: "Just as he did after the Columbine shooting, Charlton Heston showed up in Flint, to have a big pro-gun rally". You are meant to think the NRA meeting took place within 48 hours of the shooting, although Moore is careful not to actually say that. (I believe the newspaper article actually refers to a written response from the NRA, that came “within 48 hours” of the shooting, but it is taken off the screen too quickly to be sure. I await the DVD.)
Due to this almost subliminal messaging, the audience now thinks the meeting took place 48 hours after the shooting, and the next thing you hear is Heston’s spoken words "From my cold dead hands!" again. But this time it’s without the visual. (I guess Moore figured this time we’d notice it was a different speech.) Moore then shows some clips of Heston giving a pro-NRA speech, presumably in Flint.
Now lets look at the timeline. According to CNN, Kayla Rolland was killed on Feb. 29, 2000.
However, I can find no reference anywhere (outside of reviews of Moore’s movie), of any NRA rally held in Flint before October of that year. In fact, it appears that the footage shown in the movie was from October 2000. This was a political rally to support Bush's presidential candidacy - one of many such appearances by Heston during that campaign. You know this, because on the clip Moore shows, you can (if you’re quick), see a “Bush/Cheney” poster. The only impartial reference I found for the actual date, was in The Flint Journal:
Someone said this is not important since Moore is only a comedian, a bit like Jon Stewart on The Daily Show (although less funny), where everyone knows it’s made up. The trouble is, Moore pretends it’s not made up, and people believe him. And I also believe he has some useful points to make, but you don’t know when he’s telling the truth and when he isn’t. This goes beyond hyperbole and exaggeration. This is just dishonesty. Lying, actually. And I find this particularly hypocritical coming from someone who made a speech at the Oscars complaining about living in fictitious times and going to war for fictitious reasons. This film is fictitious. And it’s not the first time Moore has lied or misrepresented data. In fact, Moore admits that he does not have to be accurate in what he reports.
And now I hear he is making another “documentary”:
But, of course, Moore would never use “this tragic event” to push his agenda.
The question is, does he mean “find out” or “make up”?
I came away from the movie with the strong image of the NRA as an aggressive, insensitive organization, holding pro-gun rallies just after the shootings at both Littleton and Flint. At the end of the movie, Charlton Heston is also shown as being evasive and even dishonest in his recollection of especially the Flint rally. However, I’m now convinced Moore deliberately and dishonestly misrepresented these two events to present a very different version from what actually transpired. I’ve checked many sources on this, and the following seems to be what happened.
Firstly, the Denver NRA rally was not held specifically because of the Columbine shooting, as the movie implied. In fact, it was the annual meeting of the NRA, planned a long time in advance and difficult to change. Furthermore, the NRA severely curtailed the meeting because of the shooting: it was originally a three day event, but after the Columbine shooting, the NRA canceled their gun show and banquet, and scaled back the meeting to one day only. The meeting that remained was the minimum required by statute. None if this is mentioned by Moore.
Secondly, the speech Heston is shown giving, is actually a mix of two speeches, namely the one given in Denver, and another given a year later in Charlotte. In addition, the Denver speech is aggressively edited to remove conciliatory references and to make it sound like Heston didn’t care about the shooting. Editing tricks cover the joins. The effect is to change the meaning of Heston’s speech.
Thirdly, the NRA rally in Flint, that Moore strongly and deliberately leads you to believe took place within 48 hours of the shooting, actually took place at an unrelated election rally eight months later. (One of many that Heston attended around this time.)
These three things, if represented honestly, would have completely changed the impression given of the NRA, and of how Heston was portrayed in his interview with Moore.
Look at these details, and references:
Firstly, read in the Denver local paper what Moore didn’t tell you, namely that this meeting was required by law, and that it had been significantly scaled back:
In addition, the actual Denver speech started with a moment of silence for the Columbine victims, according to the Denver “Rocky Mountain News”::
Moore doesn’t mention any of this. His record of the Denver meeting starts with the commentary: “just 10 days after the Columbine mass murders, Heston came to Denver and held a large pro-gun rally”, and shows Heston raising a rifle, and with him speaking the words "From my cold dead hands!" Moore neglects to say that this is from Heston’s May 2000 speech (exactly a year later), given in Charlotte, NC. Read the NRA transcript of that speech: which I have corroborated from independent sources.
Having replaced the actual “a moment of silence” with a different year’s "From my cold dead hands!", Moore inserts a lengthy commentary as misdirection, and then cuts to the actual speech given in 1999. (He needs this lengthy misdirection because Heston is now wearing a different suit, shirt and tie.) Moore then heavily edits the 1999 speech to change its meaning. Here is the NRE transcript of Heston's May 1999 speech given in Denver, that I have also corroborated from independent sources.
I have quoted the whole speech. But I have put in bold and underlined, the extracts that Moore shows in his film. The other words are all omitted, See the conciliatory remarks that have been omitted. See if you think the meaning has been altered.
Moore ends with Heston’s closing remarks from a different speech he made at the end of the day. All the joins are hidden with clever editing - cutting to other scenes and back to the speech again, and so on - with Moore’s commentary as misdirection. It is clearly deliberate. (And the last paragraph is particularly ironic, considering Moore’s eventual treatment of what Heston had actually said.)
Following Denver, Moore moves on to Kayla Rolland, the little girl from Flint who was shot at her school, and whose picture Moore left at Heston’s home at the end of the movie. After covering the shooting, Moore momentarily displays a rostrum camera shot of a newspaper article, and quickly highlights and magnifies the words “within 48 hours”, and simultaneously comments: "Just as he did after the Columbine shooting, Charlton Heston showed up in Flint, to have a big pro-gun rally". You are meant to think the NRA meeting took place within 48 hours of the shooting, although Moore is careful not to actually say that. (I believe the newspaper article actually refers to a written response from the NRA, that came “within 48 hours” of the shooting, but it is taken off the screen too quickly to be sure. I await the DVD.)
Due to this almost subliminal messaging, the audience now thinks the meeting took place 48 hours after the shooting, and the next thing you hear is Heston’s spoken words "From my cold dead hands!" again. But this time it’s without the visual. (I guess Moore figured this time we’d notice it was a different speech.) Moore then shows some clips of Heston giving a pro-NRA speech, presumably in Flint.
Now lets look at the timeline. According to CNN, Kayla Rolland was killed on Feb. 29, 2000.
However, I can find no reference anywhere (outside of reviews of Moore’s movie), of any NRA rally held in Flint before October of that year. In fact, it appears that the footage shown in the movie was from October 2000. This was a political rally to support Bush's presidential candidacy - one of many such appearances by Heston during that campaign. You know this, because on the clip Moore shows, you can (if you’re quick), see a “Bush/Cheney” poster. The only impartial reference I found for the actual date, was in The Flint Journal:
That was nearly eight months later, and not connected to the shooting. Moore not only neglects to mention this, he deliberately fosters the impression that this rally was held almost immediately after, and as a direct response to, the shooting. And by later challenging Heston with this, Heston looks shifty because he says he didn’t know the NRA meeting was held just after the shooting. In reality Moore is the dishonest one, because he knows it wasn’t held just after the shooting.
Someone said this is not important since Moore is only a comedian, a bit like Jon Stewart on The Daily Show (although less funny), where everyone knows it’s made up. The trouble is, Moore pretends it’s not made up, and people believe him. And I also believe he has some useful points to make, but you don’t know when he’s telling the truth and when he isn’t. This goes beyond hyperbole and exaggeration. This is just dishonesty. Lying, actually. And I find this particularly hypocritical coming from someone who made a speech at the Oscars complaining about living in fictitious times and going to war for fictitious reasons. This film is fictitious. And it’s not the first time Moore has lied or misrepresented data. In fact, Moore admits that he does not have to be accurate in what he reports.
And now I hear he is making another “documentary”:
But, of course, Moore would never use “this tragic event” to push his agenda.
(My emphasis)
The question is, does he mean “find out” or “make up”?
