December 6 04

The goal of any filmmaker is to get the people talking. And that certainly is what Michael Moore has done with his documentary, Fahrenheit 9-11. It is a movie that has provoked, delighted, and divided many of its viewers. Some will see it as propaganda, and some will see it as travesty. But, at the end of the day, whether you like or dislike Michael Moore, you cannot deny that this movie raises questions and promotes discussion.

Questions like why have we never seen the footage of George W. sitting and reading “My Pet Goat” while his country was under attack? Why didn’t the press shed light on Ashcroft saying he was “tired of hearing about terrorism warnings” prior to September 11th? Why didn’t we know about the Bin Laden family being allowed to fly out of the US on Sept. 13th? Why did we not know about the African-American members of the House of Representatives parading before the Senate, who were not recognized because no Senators would sign their petitions?

Obviously, this film is completely biased. It’s not the last word on Bush or the war in Iraq. It’s Michael Moore’s word. He is obviously angered by Bush and his laissez-faire attitude prior to 9/11….the golfing, the fishing, the vacationing 40% of the time …and angered by the idea that oil money and politics drove the war in Iraq, and that the fear that Bush instilled in the nation was false….and angered by the money-driven web that entangles Bush, Dick Chaney, Saudi Arabia and Haliburton.

For Moore, this is exquisite payback for a moment when he and Bush came face-to-face for the first and only time. “Behave yourself, will you?” sneered Bush. “Go find real work.” And so much of this film is Moore’s sarcastic reply. For us, it’s a movie that we can laugh with (when Bush warns the people to be afraid, be very afraid…and then in the same breath says, “Now, watch this drive!”) and cry with (when Moore introduces us to Lila, the mother who lost her son in Iraq). And whether we agree with his views or not, Fahrenheit 9-11 is incredible piece of filmmaking.

-
  1. It isn’t so much about Moore’s “view” that is upsetting. It’s his presentation of spin as “facts”. In case you’re unfamiliar with his work, Moore is a liar. That’s it. I’ll grant that F9/11 doesn’t contain the outright lies of his previous films, but it is nothing more than a well crafted lie. Moore’s technique is to present you with partial facts and combine them in such a way that you inevitably draw a false conclusion.

    This and this should be informative.

    Oh, and be sure not to miss this.Moore’s movie has definitely sparked a lot of debate. I’ve always been curious, thought, why something so biased and skewed is still called a “documentary”.

    [Reply]

    Comment by Sean on December 6, 2004
  2. i knew you’d have something to say about this!!! i was only waiting…

    i do agree that he does try to present things as facts (and that the term documentary is being used very loosely here)….but i’d like to think that I, as a well-informed person, went in – after having seen several of his movies – knowing that he does this…

    [Reply]

    Comment by Ali on December 6, 2004
  3. Sean,
    While I agree with you that anything put out by M.Moore (no, not mandy – I mean the larger chested, Michael) should be taken with a grain of salt roughly the size of Gibraltar… you cannot blindly write him off as being a liar.

    The film does raise a number of very valid and disturbing points:
    1) The world is run on $. We would like to believe that our leaders are looking out for our interests, but at the end of the day, their bank accounts will always be at the foremost of their decision making.
    2) 9/11 was used as a convenient reason to attack Iraq. Look, I’m the first guy to jump up and agree that some of the arab nations need a good whoop-a$$ to get them back in line, but does that mean that Hussein had anything to do with 9/11. No. Was he hiding WMD? No. So there are a few questions you should follow-up on. Best case scenario: the CIA fumbled the ball. Twice. Worst Case: “W” wanted to go into Iraq and both 9/11 and “WMD” were a convenient battle cry.
    3) There is no question the US was/is in bed with the Saudis. $ & oil… $ & oil… that’s gotta be one slick, green, King-sized honey of a bed…
    4) Your (our) government lies to you. A lot. I’m glad there are nuts like Moore out there asking questions. That’s what the US is all about. Transparency in gov’t is the only way to keep it real.

    All that aside, I agree that Moore takes a number of things way out of context; patches together snippets; misleads interviewees; and the like. People die in war. It’s an ugly fact. But sometimes a necessary one. Moore exploits this to the n-th degree. So, as you said Caveat Emptor.

    Note: Did I mention – Mandy Moore does have a fabulous rack?

    [Reply]

    Comment by Giblet on December 6, 2004
  4. I know I know. I really am trying to be reasonable here, but I guess I wear my heart on my conservative sleeve. If Moore limited himself to raising necessary questions, that would be fine. Unfortunately he provides you with so-called reasons and leads viewers, even well-informed viewers, to the conclusion he wants you to have. He is a genius at that.

    As far as Sodom not having anything to do with 9/11 that’s true. Iraq is part of the global war on terror. Sodom is part of that war, not part of 9/11. I won’t hijack Ali’s thread to start in on that topic, I’ll leave it that. People disagree on that point, I can accept that.

    By the way, thank you for taking my oh-so-predictable input so well. I realize our opinions are probably on different ends of the political spectrum, but that doesn’t mean we can’t have political discussions that are based on, and full of, respect. I firmly believe that the biggest problem in the U.S. (politically speaking) is each side totally disregarding the legitimacy of the other. (although each side has its loons, as one of my posts pointed out).

    And I apologize if I came off as too preachy, re-reading my original post it seems like I may have.

    [Reply]

    Comment by Sean on December 6, 2004
  5. oooh…drama on my blog…can’t think of anything i enjoy more than this!!

    [Reply]

    Comment by Ali on December 6, 2004
  6. AndrewMost of the Iraqi Oil is eteihr in the Sunni controlled south, or the Kurd controlled north… leaving none for the poor Shia.

    [Reply]

    Comment by Martin on February 9, 2012
-

Allowed tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

css.php