Have you seen: Sicko? An Inconvenient Truth? or Who Killed the Electric Car?

Question

If so, your thoughts?
If not, why not?

Just wondering. I thought all three were great and informative movies and that every movie has its own "slant," so that didn't bother me one bit.

http://www.sicko-themovie.com/

http://www.climatecrisis.net/

http://www.sonyclassics.com/whokilledtheelectriccar/

Sargon, How do you know what is being said in the film if you refused to watch it (just curious)?

Answer 1

Full disclosure: I have not and will not see any of these vehicles of propaganda. You say some slant is OK, and I can agree with that. However, if one presents his film as a documentary, he is claiming to present facts. "An Inconvenient Truth" and "Sicko" both contain willful distortions of fact and misrepresentations and outright falsehoods. Moore seems to think Cuba has a better system than the US -- that ought to tell you his material is not reliable. Gore's claim of sea level rise of 20 feet, and other hysterical claims, are not supported by the science. OK, the globe has warmed a little and is expected to warm a little more -- the reality is not as alarming as Gore presents, and the action necessary is not as radical as he insists it is. Our health care system is in many ways better than any other -- the best drugs, the best cancer treatments and other medical advances come from the US because of the extent to which it is still free enterprise. Dramatic change is called for in how medical care is paid for, but the solution is less govt., not more, and less employer-based insurance, not more. The fact that health care costs have increased at more than 3x the rate of inflation for 40 years is a result of govt. intervention. It is fundamental economics-supply and demand. (Anticipating the objection that I have no standing to criticize if I have not seen the films: these criticisms can be readily found in print from reputable sources.)

Answer 2

Have not seen Sicko. Did see "Truth" can't understand the hullabaloo about the movie and the "bad science" the movie didn't present much science, just substantiated facts. I don't feel one way or the other about Gore though I'm glad to see him bring attention to an enormous problem that should be on the minds of everyone alive.
Who Killed the electric car was great full of great information and should be seen... also check out A Crude Awakening: The Oil Crash and in books read The Ecology of Commerce by Paul Hawken

Answer 3

Sicko: No, but I have seen his previous movies which only contained about 50% truth. He distorts to many facts which "in the real world" makes it fiction

Inconvenient Truth: I watched part of it. Although some good points are made, Lots of Facts were left out.

For instance: The sun(radiation hitting earths atmosphere) and Solar Flares( natural occurence) was not discussed, yet it plays a bigger role than man in this issue.

Volcano's were not discussed. Here's why it should have been. Every time a Volcano erupts, the pollution caused by one eruption does more damge in a single day, than every nation can do in 20yrs time. Yet he failed to mention this Fact.

Don't get me wrong, I firmly believe that we need to get off our oil dependence, and I recycle but that movie left out too many Inconvenient Truths (Inconvenient to Al Gore that is)

Answer 4

Have seen all three. Very well done "visual editorials" about pressing topics of our time. Thought provoking, whatever one's pre-existing views on these subjects.

Americans are good at dragging our feet about what we don't want to do until there is a crisis : all three of these movies bear that out. The only place the "common weal" exists in the US is on paper, or in the imagination of patriots who prattle about freedom without really examining the freedoms that we have lost and are losing, including the freedom to breath air that is not chokingly foul, and the freedom to not have one's finances & lifesavings demolished by a catastrophic illness.

Michael Moore's brilliant portrayal of our health care system made me want to throw up - I was ashamed to be part of a country that treated it's citizens like this.

Part of how I got to see these movies was that I live in a large metropolitan area, so there is at least one theater that shows non-first run movies, such as art movies, foreign movies, and cool, progressive visual editorials like "WKtEC?". Perhaps some people who would have appreciated them did not live close enough to such a theater.

Just reflections, nothing more.

Peace,

;-)

Answer 5

out of those 3 i saw who killed the electric car, and that was a good documentary the other 2 are not documentaries but propaganda

who killed the electric car really pissed me off , its a shame that the people who really started that going are the ones who also killed it , and that was the Democrats on the consumer board in California. they never should of reversed there zero emission standard it was working

PADSTER:Ive seen all of moorse other films and a persons film style doesn't change there is more than a slant to his films. there is out right lies, and same with a inconvenient truth, ill watch documentaries all night long , but wont watch lies and half truths.

Answer 6

I saw An Inconvenient Truth. Well, it was a teeny bit slanted towards the truth, and the barrels were undebatedly tilted toward non-believers. But, it's really disturbing!!!

Hey, you should read Dude, Where's My Country? by Michael Moore. OK, the guy's a bit, uh, crazy, but he's got the facts. Oh yeah, Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them is pretty good too.

Answer 7

Sicko was a great film. Not completely true, but it did have valid truths to it. It was a good watch, and I cried for underpriveledged Americans when I watched. I also felt very lucky that I live in a country where I can see a doctor for free whenever I need one.

Answer 8

I thought they were overly propaganda-laden biased, poorly made, dreadfully inconsistent, but interesting movies, when watched with the proper perspective.

Answer 9

sicko is brilliant, i loved it. it annoys me that people won´t listen to michael moore just because they dont like him, or think he´s biased - im like you about the everything having a slant, and i trust myself to pick out the facts and make my own judgement - rather than refuting everything some1 says, because i dont want to hear it.
I´v also seen an inconvenient truth, and whilst it was not nearly as entertaining as sicko it was very informative. It still didnt leave me convinced of the extent to which it is claimed we are contributing to GW, but it did present a lot of interesting information about ocean streams and global weather patterns etc. which i found to be interesting.
i havnt seen the other1


People like "thedude" are exactly who i´m talking about here - he´s made up his mind already, so now refuses to listen to FACTS, because they contradict his OPINION.

Answer 10

No. I prefer FACTUAL documentaries if I watch them.

And when it comes to fiction, they're not very believable.