thommickel I have to admit, I'm baffled by the constant attacks on Moore, (that his films are supposedly sloppy, poorly researched, one-sided and full of "lies.") I'm not saying that every single detail in "F911" is true, but I think Moore's films are a lot more accurate and balanced than he gets credit for. I think Moore's films, by and large are every bit as accurate as most "serious" documentary films (the only difference being that Moore's films generate blockbuster box office). Most of the attacks that I've seen on Moore's work are often highly selective, misleading and full of lies themselves. And these days, what exactly is the "truth"? I mean, Bush tells more lies in a typical 15-minute speech than you'll get from watching any Moore film. (But you'd never convince a brainwashed fanatical Bush supporter that their beloved hero lies about anything). And Fox "News" spews out lies and right-wing propaganda 24 hours a day. Even the media that the intellectual Left respects (The New York Times) is full of lies these days. I mean, reporter Judith ("Bush's Case for War is Solid") Miller told many lies in a highly deceptive manner. Bottom line: if Moore's work was so full of "lies," then he would not have been the target of the extraordinary and vicious attacks and deaths threats that he's received from the Right in this country. Instead of going through Moore's work with a fine tooth comb and trying to pick out tiny flaws, I suggest you examine the central premise that Moore raises in his work. Most of the investigative legwork in "F911" for example was done by Craig Unger, who's "House of Bush, House of Saud" was a devastating indictment of the Bush Crime Family. Unger's work was, by the way, completely ignored by the U.S. mainstream media----so we ought to be grateful to Moore for giving Unger a platform that he otherwise wouldn't have had. And as far as the "lies" in Moore's films, instead of slandering the man's films with sweeping generalizations, how about someone here actually specifically detailing a few of these "lies" for a change?

MovieManMenzel The Divided State could quite possibility be one of the best documentaries I have ever seen mainly because it plays both sides of the fence. However it still proves to me one thing that conservatives are very narrow and close minded people. In one scene in the movie, two professors from Utah State try to stand up and express themselves to Sean Hannity and all he does is mock them for having a difference of opinion. The thing I like is that the film never really takes a side but films both sides as everything goes down. In the middle of Moore's Speech, two protesters break in and yell at Moore for not voting for Nader instead of Kerry. Calling him a traitor for not voting for Nader like he did in 2000. It's a great documentary maybe actually just as good as Fahrenheit 9/11 which I still think today is a great documentary and think that Moore himself isn't a bad guy but just wants people to ask questions and be aware of what's going on. It's sad but I rather be liberal and open-minded when it comes to the world then conservative and not be able to listen to different viewpoints. The real shame here is that so few will see this great documentary which you can tell was made for next to nothing but is very powerful and brutally honest. I rarely give movies a perfect 10 score but I really think this movie deserves it. And how about that Kay Anderson? What a nut-case. I mean that guy was completely nuts, trying to pay off the school just so Michael Moore wouldn't speak there! The guy sat there with a $25,000 cashier check. It's amazing though how this movie shows the real freedom of speech we have in America and what some will do to stop it. Amazing stuff, I recommend all to check this one out!

mountaindesert Most college students find themselves lost in the bubble of academia, cut off from the communities in which they study and live. Their conversations are held with their fellow students and the college faculty. Steven Greenstreet's documentary is a prime example of a disillusioned college student who judges the entire community based on limited contact with a small number of its members.The documentary focused on a small group of individuals who were portrayed as representing large groups of the population. As is usual, the people who scream the most get the most media attention. Other than its misrepresentation of the community in which the film was set, the documentary was well made. My only dispute is that the feelings and uproar depicted in the film were attributed to the entire community rather than the few individuals who expressed them.Naturally it is important to examine a controversy like this and make people aware of the differences that exist between political viewpoints, but it is ridiculous to implicate an entire community of people in the actions of a few radicals.

rockyfive I saw this film and it's amazing. It's about the failure of civil discourse in America and it shows the current divisive nature of politics. Whether you agree with Michael Moore or not, you'll agree that the crazy people who tried to stop him from speaking overreacted immensely and made Utah look like some foreign country. Additionally, I think the film was unbiased and showed an honest portrayal or the events without skewing the facts or taking things out of context.I don't understand why some people gave this film a "1" rating. They either must hate films about positive messages, have never seen the film, or are just jealous that it's so bloody good. I give it a "10" across the board. See this film! You'll learn something!