Poor poor piteful me...or whinging

[shadowkat]

(Poor poor piteful me is from an old, 1970s, Linda Rondstadt
song that I last heard when I was 8, fits today.)



Well, I *finally* got hold of the cable company. Appears it's not just a general outtage, it's just my cable that is out, in which case they need to send a technician. Of course the
earliest was Tuesday at 10-noon. Nope. Sorry. Finally got a temp job, can't afford to stay home and play with the cable repair man. So they scheduled an appointment for Saturday at
2-6pm. What this means is - I won't be able to watch Nip/Tuck, The 4400, Rescue Me, or The Dead Zone this week. Or anything else I was watching. The only channels I get are unnecessary ones such as 21, the Food Channel, a couple of foreign language channels, and TV Guide Channel. The good news is they will credit my account for the period of the outtage.
The bad news, I'm without my distracting/comforting toy for the week. Oh well, should probably do more reading and writing anyway. Only one problem, I think I hurt my back last week at work - it feels like someone hit me real hard in the middle of my back and my left calve muscel is still pretty tight. And since I'm doing the same things this week that I did last week, ie. lots of bending and filing, and the computer screen/desk top is way below eye level - this may be a problem.
So coming home, relaxing on sofa, with heating pad would have been ideal solution - harder to do without tv.

Why is it when one thing works out, another falls apart? Want to explain that one to me? Why can't everything work at once?
Yes, I know, whine, whine, whine. I'm frigging lucky to have air conditioning, plenty of books to read, a computer, and wait, a temporary job! What's a little back pain? Or tv outtage?



Oh for anyone who's seen Farenheit 9/11 on my Flist? Check out ginmar's take - this is from someone who is actually in Iraq.

http://www.livejournal.com/users/ginmar/288220.html?view=3137756#t3137756

Have to say she does a good job of pin-pointing what it is that bugs
me about Michael Moore. I wish he would stop manipulating and editing facts to persuade people and just let the facts speak for themselves.
Don't get me wrong, I don't like Bush. But whenever I watch a Michael Moore documentary, I'm aware of the manipulation behind the scenes, I can feel him pulling my string and that makes me uneasy. It also makes him more of a propagandist than a documentarian in my opinion.

Comments

[ponygirl2000.livejournal.com]

whenever I watch a Michael Moore documentary, I'm aware of the manipulation behind the scenes,

Ah yes, but don't you think that he's actually trying to draw awareness to that manipulation by going blatantly over the top with it? I'm thinking of the parade of nations sequence, where he uses the most bizarre stock footage to represent countries in the coalition, polka-dancers and the like; or when he puts Bush into an episode of Bonanza. By underlining the manipulation it makes the audience aware of the film's artificial nature, it's a bit of a distancing effect that ideally allows for more objective analysis.

There are all different styles of documentary - cinema verite is the kind that espouses straightforward presentation of facts with minimal interference, though there are always debates about how truthful that can be, any time you put a camera in front of something or edit footage you're creating a point of view. Moore's style is most certainly not verite, and even though I haven't heard him claim that he's doing journalism, I'd say he's closest in style to the Daily Show. Those guys avoid a lot of criticism by being very even-handed with their satire, they usually deny the label of journalism but they do try to hold onto some of its principles of objectivity. Moore on the other hand has a very definite agenda. I don't even think it's entirely Bush=evil but rather that Moore is a socialist of the old school. He pursues any link to big business no matter how tenuous usually to his movies' detriment.

The things that for me worked the best were the absurdist moments, and oddly the two scenes that were the most verite: the grief of both the Iraqi mother and the American mother. Of course those have been criticized for being too invasive but I thought they really demonstrated what humanity really is - it is impossible not to connect with those women, not to feel their emotions as something universal. And yeah, it was manipulative in the inclusion.

I think the film was a bit of a mess, and I do think Moore stretches his points near to breaking but the debates are a lot of fun!

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Do have a confession to make here - I've avoided seeing the film because Moore's interviewing tactics make me flinch. I barely made it through Bowling for Columbine. (Really have troubles watching people embarrass themselves on-screen.)Also because I can't watch footage regarding 9/11 without bursting into tears, for some reason. I have however seen other Michael Moore documentaries or op-ed pieces and he just annoys me.

But your analysis - makes me wonder about it.
It actually sounds sort of interesting. May wait until it comes out on video or DVD.

Ginmar's take is an interesting one as is the debate going on in her livejournal which she's annoying and I allowed myself to get embroiled in out boredom. LOL!