There are few movie makers as biased, as strident, and as factually challenged as Michael Moore, but movie critics offer glowing reviews of his movies. The Columbine movie is filled with errors. Even Christopher Hitchens found Moore's claims just too much. Of course, I could also include Al Gore's movie in this discussion, but there too many possible extraneous factors with Gore being a former VP.
I also have problems with Dinesh D'Souza's new film on Obama, but even if one doesn't think that Dinesh has proven his case, he doesn't take the liberty in making up facts the way that Moore does. The fact that there are relatively few reviewers who even see Dinesh's movie and that only 28% of all reviewers and just 14% of "top critics" give it a thumbs up shows how incredibly biased the reviewers are.
Audience reviews for 2016 seem very close to the average for the three Moore movies (77 to 79%), though I am sure that people could object the objectivity of the audiences that see either movie. 2016 has brought in more revenue that two of Moore's movies and quite a bit less than what he got for Fahrenheit 9/11.