Shame on Michael Moore

Charlton Heston died on Saturday. The man who played Moses in The Ten Commandments was known for playing such heroic roles. In the 1950s and 60s he was “one of a handful of Hollywood actors to speak out openly against racism” and later a vocal advocate of conservative politics.
It’s a deplorable fact that [...]

HestonCharlton Heston died on Saturday. The man who played Moses in The Ten Commandments was known for playing such heroic roles. In the 1950s and 60s he was “one of a handful of Hollywood actors to speak out openly against racism” and later a vocal advocate of conservative politics.

It’s a deplorable fact that the image many people will remember of Heston is not his acting in heroic roles or his service during WWII or his opposition to racism, but instead his depiction by the manipulative fuckwit filmmaker Michael Moore in Bowling For Columbine, in which Heston was harassed in old age and in his own home by Moore for daring to suggest that guns were not the causes of murder but merely sometimes the means. This week, Michael Moore dares to display an image in memory of Heston on his website, no doubt in response to some of the backlash he received for the humiliating way he characterised him in his film. Shame on you, jackass.

2 Comments

  1. Quinney on April 8, 2008 | Permalink

    I agree shame on him.

  2. Joe on April 9, 2008 | Permalink

    I think the way Moore portrayed him in the film is symptomatic of how society in general treats its older citizens. I know that throughout the film Moore alluded to Heston and essentially painted him as the figurehead of the pro gun lobby. But the most horrible part for me was the final ’showdown’, as Moore would no doubt call it. He clearly took advantage of an ageing old man who clearly had trouble expressing himself effectively against Moore. Its similar to what has happened Anthony Flew lately in relation to intelligent design. Older people are an easy target. This is perhaps not shocking in a society which seems to view worth in relation to ones economic viability. Why spend money on services for the older members of society when they are in permanent decline? Yet conveniently forgetting that they have been contributing to society their whole lives.

POST A COMMENT

Your email is never published nor shared.

CONNECT

John on Facebook

FOLLOW

John on Twitter

LISTEN

John at KLPZ