wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

Photographs can reveal and can conceal: another profound point that surely nobody has ever thought about before. Morris is a master at peddling triviality as earth-shattering truths. Here we have a self-appointed know-it-all condescendingly lecturing a nation of simpleton. Sad all around.

Errol Morris has made an important discovery: human beings are human beings are human beings. Wow, how profound. If people have said (and why in the world does Morris think that EVERYONE has? Never got a call from him myself...) that these soldiers are "monsters", they certainly don't mean it literally. Just like when we say somebody is a pig, we don't mean it literally. What a monumental pompous jerk to take literally what is not meant to be taken literally by those who say it, and then make a movie just to say that what is said is not literally true. This guy is so full of it. Gurrrhhhh!

It's a little disappointing that when someone as thoughtful and insightful as Mr. Morris comes on this show that the majority of the "comments" tend to be such insipid and pointless moaning, some of it not even about Mr. Morris!

I agree with the above comments that it is nice to hear an interviewer steer a person away from their talking points. It is annoying to hear a person making the publicity rounds and say the EXACT SAME THING ON EVERY SHOW! Thanks Lenny!

Bravo to Errol for calling Lopate out on his habit of interrupting his guests and doing more of the talking they do! I realize the need to interject with explanations of points that may be unfamiliar to listeners, but too often I get the sense Lenny would much rather ask and answer all his questions, or just ask them in a way that gives him 80% of the air time.

Agree with Eva on Leonard's interview style. Occasionally too much, yes, but more often you hear the interviewee say, "Wow, that's a good question" or "I hadn't thought of it that way." He has often closely examined the subject's work. It's an informed and experienced interviewer that can cut to the chase more succinctly than the subject. And ask probing questions.

As with anyone doing such a live-action, high-wire act, there must be better and worse days. But for the most part he is astoundingly consistent and professional.

I've often thought he might write a fine book, "How to Interview."

Lenny -- major props for keeping your cool and keeping Morris in line in terms of delivering a good interview despite his adolescent baiting. You're a true pro.

I happen to enjoy Leonard's comments.
Sometimes it seems like interviewees hand in a set of talking point questions to be asked in order to promote the film (which they have to do, I know, but...)
Leonard may overdo it, but I appreciate that he conducts this as a dialogue SO THAT IT DOESN"T SOUND LIKE ALL THE OTHER INTERVIEWS MORRIS IS DOING TO MARKET THE FILM.
BTW, I can't wait to see the film. Morris is great. And I'm glad Leonard has a sense of humor.

morris is a loose cannon! what a character.

i love it. i think people also mistake his eccentric confrontational humor for pompous stupidity. he is far from stupid.

anyone who chooses to dismiss his work because of his "tone" in this interview is missing out on some great films.

The show is well great, the guests are typically engaging, but I have to agree that Lenny interrupts a little too frequently, often undermining the points that his guests are trying to make. I think he's a good host except for the frequent interruptions. There's always time to pontificate after the fact.

I thank Mr. Morris for trying so hard to put Mr. Lopate into his place. Simply pyt, Mr. Lopate inserts himself into the conversations too much--always. He abruptly interrupts his own interviewees with what is often wrong information and--(and to me this is the worst) often makes moral aspersions on their own lives i.e. "well, if you hadn't done that when you were twenty then you wouldn't have become...etc." He does this over and over again.

Mr. Lopate's show itself, the framework of it--the guests themselves and the research bulwark--is great, is often engaging; but Mr. Lopate seems to be forgetting more and more that we listen to hear what his guests have to say.

For example--he has experts on his show--linguists, carpenters, etc.--yet when listeners call in with questions for them, Mr. Lopate actually answers the questions along with the experts!

I thank you again, Mr. Morris, for bringing this to the surface. I think, for people like you, the show must be a necessary evil, and that's sad.

Morris suffers from a flaw that riddles so many "documentary" photographers and film folks: a belief that "truth" exists and that they might plumb it for the rest the great unwashed.

Morris is powerfully arrogant in his failure to address/foreground how "truth" itself is a construction and that his own techniques in gaining interviews, setting up scenes, etc. involves manipulation and mediation. He admits that his "recreations" (or whatever jargon he uses to address the objective/subjective divide) might be terminologically flawed, but I would encourage him to think long and hard about what insights the slippage in vocabulary might hold for his larger arguments.

Ha! He just said he hopes to be back again.

Let us fervently pray that he is not. Bookers, please note...

"..this war was about humiliating Iraqi men.."

those pictues, that torture..i guess this is what 'abstinence only' gets you.

seriously, why does anyone vote for creeps like bush and cheney anyway? am i the only one who got the heebejeebees from even looking at these guys? and yes, you can throw reagan into the pot, although i will be the first to admit that bush makes him look like a genius.

Ask Morris about the re-enactments mentioned in the NY Press article.

http://www.nypress.com/21/17/film/ArmondWhite.cfm

This is one twisty character. Challenging interview!

Okay, so Morris claims that using women to sexually humiliate Iraqi men was part of policy. Can you ask him to back this claim up instead of changing the subject?

This interview is running a close second to Terry Gross' encounter with Gene Simmons for the most bizarre interview on NPR.

He is pompous, isn't he?

great negative view of the film by Armond White

Errol Morris is more interested in political posturing and special effects than exposing a military disgrace

http://www.nypress.com/21/17/film/ArmondWhite.cfm

I will never view this mans movies because of self important tone!

I'd like to hear more about abu graib in the context of Arendt's "banality of evil" concept. How do her comments about Eichmann apply or not apply here? Eichmann was a higher up; the higher-ups are neglected here. The little evidence of lower level Nazis who didn't go along with genocide apparently suggests it was tolerated? How about here, any soldiers resist?

I agree Take Away was a disappointment and agree that Morris would be excellent for that type of program. He really thinks for himself.

I recommend to all listeners his analysis of alleged falsification Crimean picture that appears in NY Times blogs.

I notice that Mr. Morris dodged the question as to "Why" these people submitted to the interview. He didn't mention that he paid them for the interviews.

keep up the good work, Leonard, and don't humor this pompous bore too much.

Wars always create a common denominator of behavior. The brutality of jungle fighting in the Pacific War was orders of magnitude worse than what happens in Iraq for example. While no one questions that what happened at Abu Ghraib was deplorable to bring in Eichmann, concentration camps and the lexicon of the Hoplocaust is way over the top. The problem is that too few Americans serve in the Armed Forces or have any contact with those who do. They'd be much less cavalier about warmaking if they did.

BTW,to avoid confusion about my posting, I am not the same John as the first post. I normally go by Jonathan, to avoid comment ownership confusion, for what that's worth.

Where is the article explaining the woman who was smiling over the dead prisoner? Also, can you ask Morris about his issues with the banality of evil again so he can finish his point?

Morris may be an accomplished filmmaker- but he is one major self important, pompous jerk.

Morris reminds me of the most ponderous, self-important professors I ever had. His films are interesting, but he is one slow-talking bore, which kind of reveals how arrogant he is. Interesting how some of you identify with him so much.

Please comment more about the meaning of the phrase "The benality of evil.

Leonard talks too much and constantly clarifies his questions more as to show his own knowledge than anything else. He interrupts his interviewees and does not let them tell their stories and thoughts. This is applicable for all interviewees.

OK if Take Away were this guy and Steve Post together I'd listen every day twice!!

Ease up, Leonard, this guy's way different. We need to hear what he has to say.

Anyone who has issues with Arendt's "banality of evil" concept should be heard out.

This guy just proved whay you keep asking, Len. Are regular people who are put into extraordianry situations bent to do things that are unethical? he just said the behavior was across the board from the top down. that many of these people were thinking about what they were doing and knew it was wrong and did it anyway. this proves the experiments on behavior and authority that you, Lenord, keep bringing up that for some reason he wants to dodge. Seems like he wants to carve his own nitche in this area of study.

wow! Errol is yelling at Lenny!

Leonard, why didn't you let Morris finish his point about the banality of evil? Maybe you are talking too much.