#1 Documentary of All Time!

[Tony]

But, to paraphrase a bumper sticker I recently saw, I am an NPR mind stuck in a FOX News world.

I saw someone with that same bumper sticker yesterday on my way home from work while driving on 290. Is that where you saw it?

 

[evildave]

Total US Gross: $61,169,000
http://movieweb.com/movies/box_office/daily/film_daily.php?id=990&ym=200407

It's made 1/3 as much as Spiderman, a blockbuster special effects movie full of eye candy.

And it's only been out for a little over a week. I surmise the 'Jackass' figure is for its total run in all the theaters, world-wide.

Currently, it's still out-earning everything but "Spider Man", and it's holding its own in the summer box office. It's not like the viewing public has nothing else to go see. I don't see where this figure is even including money from anywhere but the U.S. and Canada, yet.

Oh well, it's not surprising that people who think that attacking Iraq was a good idea, and that giving up constitutional rights is a good idea, have weak analytical skills as well.

 

[c0rbin]

To all. It is obvious to all. Personal attacks and pompous indignation at those who don't live up to a high standard you propose for them are in obvious contrast to all. To all, I say... now refute that if you have the erudition.

I am talking about documentary films here. What the Hell are you talking about?

Seriously dude.

Seriously.

Fill your mouth with feces and spit at the priest because you don't think he's doing mass the way you think it should be done... but don't expect me to think well of you when you do.

???

No one cares if the standards you arbitrarily set were for a documentary at the same time that the personal attack you deliver isn't from a documentary.

Still struggling to understand your point.

Your behavior is in contrast to your so-called standards and everyone knows it. Yes, I think it's obvious enough that I can say that.

I am a person. I am not a documentary film. Now what is your point?

Since the only documentary you have applied this standard to is F911, then I believe all other documentaries in existence are not being evaluated on this same scale.

I have not seen F911. I doubt it is a documentary based on my knowledge of previous Moore flicks. Let me say that I am sure it is quite an entertaining film. I found Bowling for Columbine an entertaining film.

Documentary it was not.

Although it may be that you simply believe all documentaries in existence have achieved a high level of "truth" and that each one has tried to achieve truth in the fashion you ascribe.

I would appreciate it if Moore, when claiming to make a documentary, would strive for truth and pull back on the manipulations. In the absence of the word "documentary" Moore's films are at least entertaining and emotional.

Which is the point of my previous posts in which I want to know what "truth" was being pushed in Winged Migration.

Never saw it.

And as Aero has shown that Jacka** is a documentary... then why don't you explain the high standard of "verity" in that film?

I never claimed Jackass was a documentary.

 

[c0rbin]

I wanted to add that in a film like Winged Migration and many other documentaries, no agenda is pushed. The events are displayed for the audience to come to their own conclusions.

 

[c0rbin]

I saw someone with that same bumper sticker yesterday on my way home from work while driving on 290. Is that where you saw it?

Was it a hippy-looking wagon kind of thing with another sticker that had many religious symbols on it?

I saw it at the West Road-290 underpass (by Sams and the Saturn dealership).

 

[aerocontrols]

And it's only been out for a little over a week.

2 weeks.

I surmise the 'Jackass' figure is for its total run in all the theaters, world-wide.

You don't have to surmise. I wrote that the figure was the domestic gross.

 

[wjousts]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: #1 Documentary of All Time!

I read it, but you are talking about how much money f911 made yet you are only looking at opening weekend theater numbers.

Sorry Grammatron, but we were discussing opening weekend ticket sales:

Originally posted by aerocontrols
It made approximately the same amount in its opening weekend as Jacka**, another low-budget documentary. (F/911~$6million, Jacka**~$5million)

Hence the reason for discussing only opening weekend theather numbers.

 

[Mr Manifesto]

I wanted to add that in a film like Winged Migration and many other documentaries, no agenda is pushed. The events are displayed for the audience to come to their own conclusions.

You don't think there was any manipulation or editing in Winged Migration to present the views of the film-makers?

 

[Grammatron]

The thing that bothers me is the way people spend time analyzing Moore & don't concentrate on the content of the film itself.

If we shoot the messenger(s) enough times.... will that change ANYTHING the Bush administration has done or not done?

That's reasonable, however that's also what supporters of Moore did/do to the critics of the movie.

 

[wjousts]

As I said, my first link.

See also these links


It is unsurprising to me that various news outlets would not mention Jacka** as a documentary since F 9/11 is only doing slightly better than Jacka**: The Movie.

Certainly the New York Times has forgotten.

Look at your earlier post (emphisis mine):

I'm not an authority on what is or isn't a documentary. If you'll go back to my original link, however, you'll see that IMDB calls it a documentary. As does everyone else I can find.

Everybody else you can find? Clearly you didn't look too hard since you didn't even bother to look at one of the links you posted earlier.

 

[Grammatron]

You don't think there was any manipulation or editing in Winged Migration to present the views of the film-makers?

Yeah those penguins were republicans and not democrats...

What the heck are you talking about?

 

[Mr Manifesto]

DVD Review on Winged Migration

The filmmakers describe Winged Migration not as a "documentary" or a "movie," but rather, as "a natural tale," which is a fitting description. Blurring the line between scripted motion picture and nature documentary, the film has the outward appearance of a mammoth and sweeping documentary, but in reality, the film has very little emphasis in fact or ornithological information and sequences occur that are obviously scripted and manufactured for dramatic effect.

This strange hybrid finds a surprising balance between the Zen-like documentary-style approach of simply pointing a camera at nature and allowing the viewer to appreciate the beauty of the subject, and the manipulative, but dramatic approach of orchestrating sequences of footage in order to heighten and expand the picture like a mainstream feature film.

CS Monitor on Winged Migration

"Winged Migration," nominated for the best-documentary Oscar, leaves the human realm for the world of birds, continuing a string of nature movies by French filmmaker Jacques Perrin. He dispatched more than 450 people to film it, organizing them into separate units following avian flights over all seven continents.

Some of their images have the up-close naturalism of Audubon bird paintings, savoring the markings and motions of our feathered friends in colorful detail. Other times the footage is out-and-out spectacular, with eye-filling juxtapositions of bird flocks and sweeping natural vistas.

(the point being: What process do you think lead them to decide what to keep and what to omit in the film?)

Film Judge on Winged Migration (contains sound file)

There are flaws in the film as I see it: the music sometimes adds too much bias to the film, though this is forgivable as it helps immensely in reaching a more mainstream audience; the voice narration is intrusive -- I would have preferred more subtitles such as those that provide traveling distance information to the infrequent vocal interruptions; and finally, the CGI elements of the film do offer a sense of global perspective at times, but are used too frequently and distract at times from the entrancing beauty of the rest of the production. On the other hand that could be a blessing since the film is often so entrancing that once in a while we need a bit of a jolt to get things back into perspective.

You will find in any documentary that there is editing and manipulation of images to present the view of the film-maker. Any post-modernist could tell you that. To suggest that Moore shouldn't have done so is to hold him to a standard no other documentary maker is held to.

Moore's documentary is not about some objective truth that doesn't exist, it's about debate. I wonder if it succeeded in that regard?

 

[wjousts]

I wanted to add that in a film like Winged Migration and many other documentaries, no agenda is pushed. The events are displayed for the audience to come to their own conclusions.

I'd disagree there. If you're making a film about lions and it features a scene where the pride of lions takes down a wilderbeast at a river crossing you'll present the event in a different way to another film-maker making a film about wilderbeast and filming the exact same event. So I guess anything with a pro-lion/anti-wilderbeast or pro-wilderbeast/anti-lion bais should not be considered a documentary?
And what about war documentaries? How many American made Vietnam documentaries really give equal time to a fair representation of the Vietcon? Most documentaries have a perspective that it far from being the only one. F9/11 has a perspective on the facts it presents, it's not the only perspective, but Moore is not obliged to present every perspective especially if he doesn't understand some of the alternative views.

 

[aerocontrols]

Everybody else you can find? Clearly you didn't look too hard since you didn't even bother to look at one of the links you posted earlier.

No, I didn't do an exhaustive search, and you're correct that I didn't check the box office site for that information, as I only went there for the box office numbers. As we've already discovered, what is or is not a documentary is open to debate, and I've already told you that I'm no expert.

 

[Mr Manifesto]

I'd disagree there. If you're making a film about lions and it features a scene where the pride of lions takes down a wilderbeast at a river crossing you'll present the event in a different way to another film-maker making a film about wilderbeast and filming the exact same event. So I guess anything with a pro-lion/anti-wilderbeast or pro-wilderbeast/anti-lion bais should not be considered a documentary?

And, in fact, what many people don't realise is often the wilderbeest are hamstrung so that it's easier for lions to catch them. Lions more-often-than-not don't hunt their prey. They wait for jackals to do the work, then boot them off and eat what they've caught. Truth being manipulated, you see.

 

[evildave]

Jackass Box Office
http://movieweb.com/movies/film.php?73

The site only shows one week of accumulated data for F911.
http://www.the-movie-times.com/thrsdir/top60dir/top60Search.mv?Fahrenheit 9/11

Jackass Weekly Box Office
http://www.the-movie-times.com/thrsdir/top60dir/top60Search.mv?Jackass: The Movie

This site also has a "compare to another movie" feature that may come in handy eventually. When 'F911' pops up on the drop-down, probably when they have more than a few weeks of figures to to work with.

Judging from the histories, I'd say you would have to accumulate at least eight weeks of performance with F911 before the Jackass figure can reasonably be compared with it.

Of course, then there's the concept of 'evergreen' to consider. How long can F911 run in theaters? Will it continue hold its own when 'I, Robot' premieres? I bet it stays running right through November.

Of course, all of this is a mere distraction to the ultimate message:

"The President is a fink."

 

[Mr Manifesto]

And, in fact, what many people don't realise is often the wilderbeest are hamstrung so that it's easier for lions to catch them. Lions more-often-than-not don't hunt their prey. They wait for jackals to do the work, then boot them off and eat what they've caught. Truth being manipulated, you see.

Interesting article on wildlife documentary filming techniques (nothing about injuring animals to make them easier to catch but IT DOES HAPPEN! I READ IT IN READERS' DIGEST, AND READERS' DIGEST DOESN'T LIE!)

Not restricted to the field, the hidden hand of the nature filmmaker is also a force in the editing room. "Making one of these films is like building a Rolls Royce from the ground up," Page declares. "And how the scenes are put together is very important." For one thing, filmmakers often change the order in which events actually occur. A case in point: Bayer wove film shot over five different years into a portrait of winter in Yellowstone National Park, which seamlessly and timelessly floats unanchored to any particular date. Filmmakers also often propel plot lines along by sequencing footage to imply that certain animals crossed paths when, in reality, never the twain did meet.

Body parts can also be mixed and matched on film. One way, for example, to dramatize distant chases is to periodically flash onto the screen close-ups of subjects' eyes or faces. But because obtaining head shots of wild animals on the run is often impossible, those of zoo cousins are sometimes used instead.

The whole article is well worth a read.

 

[Sloe_Bohemian]

And, in fact, what many people don't realise is often the wilderbeest are hamstrung so that it's easier for lions to catch them. Lions more-often-than-not don't hunt their prey. They wait for jackals to do the work, then boot them off and eat what they've caught. Truth being manipulated, you see.

Jackals?


Are you sure you don't mean hyennas? Aren't jackals small dog-creatures a bit smaller than coyotes? But maybe bigger than foxes?

I would expect lions to steal from jaguars (who will try to drag their meals up into trees for this very reason), cheetahs and especially hyennas... with whom lions have fierce battles. But what kind of prey do jackals pull down? Newborns and mice? Or am I really wrong about the jackal?

 

[Mr Manifesto]

Jackals?


Are you sure you don't mean hyennas? Aren't jackals small dog-creatures a bit smaller than coyotes? But maybe bigger than foxes?

I would expect lions to steal from jaguars (who will try to drag their meals up into trees for this very reason), cheetahs and especially hyennas... with whom lions have fierce battles. But what kind of prey do jackals pull down? Newborns and mice? Or am I really wrong about the jackal?

Hyenas, yeah, my bad.

 

[aerocontrols]

Jackals?


Are you sure you don't mean hyennas? Aren't jackals small dog-creatures a bit smaller than coyotes? But maybe bigger than foxes?

I would expect lions to steal from jaguars (who will try to drag their meals up into trees for this very reason), cheetahs and especially hyennas... with whom lions have fierce battles. But what kind of prey do jackals pull down? Newborns and mice? Or am I really wrong about the jackal?

I think Manifesto has fallen pray to disinformation peddled by biased documentarians.

This link says that jackals sometimes eat young gazelles, but it could be lying too.