 |
Truth is a funny
thing. Truth is rarely black and white,
though it should be. Truth is often a matter
of perception. The same truth told by two
different people can elicit different responses
based solely on how much of the truth is
being told. It doesn’t have to be
distorted; you just have to hold back. Here’s
a good example. I had a friend recently
send me one of those joke emails that circulate
the Internet. It claimed that someone saw
a sign on a business here in the U.S. that
stated, “WE WOULD RATHER DO BUSINESS
WITH 1000 AL QAEDA TERRORISTS THAN WITH
A SINGLE AMERICAN!” Now, this in itself
could be considered a truth. Like most people,
learning this truth would make you angry
at any business that would put up a sign
like that. But if you add another piece
of the truth, say for example that the business
was a funeral home. Does that change the
way you feel?
Before I get into the truth that is presented
in Michael Moore’s new film, “Fahrenheit
9/11”, I would like to say I am no
fan of the Bush administration. It has been
an embarrassment to this country from the
start and I can say without hesitation that
I hope Bush is ousted in November.
|
This is a decision made long before seeing “Fahrenheit
9/11.” This is not to say that I am a Democrat.
In reality I am non partisan; opting to vote for
whomever I feel is the best person for the job.
Over the last few years however, it’s sad
to see that instead of trying to decide who
to vote for, the choices have become more
a case of who to vote against.
What is difficult about reviewing “Fahrenheit
9/11” is that in order to be fair I have
decided I must do so from an unbiased standpoint.
I must find a way to tell you whether or not it
was a good film without letting my personal feelings
get in the way. It would be too easy for me to
say, “The movie is great!!! Bad Bush!! Baaaad
Bush,” but that would do little to validate
my credibility as a critic. Much in the same way
that you shouldn’t believe the critics who
can only say, “Its all lies!!! Lies! Lies,
I tell ya’,” or “That Michael
Moore is a big fat so and so.” Comments
like those have no bearing on the quality of the
film and come only from those who have no other
recourse than to bash the film or the person directly.
“Fahrenheit 9/11” is, despite what
others might say, a documentary. But it is also
much more than that, it is the modern equivalent
of a propaganda film. The main difference between
the propaganda films created during the World
Wars is in the way the ‘enemy’ is
presented. During World War II for example, propaganda
films often represented the Nazis or the Japanese
as inhuman monsters, which made killing them all
the more palatable to the American public. In
“Fahrenheit 9/11”, Moore chooses instead
to make the ‘enemy’, in this case
the Bush administration, look like buffoons using
all manner of film footage of goofs, gaffes and
contradictory statements. But in spite of this
difference, it is still a propaganda film. Moore
wants you to watch this movie and decide right
there and then not to vote for Bush.
As far as documentaries go, “Fahrenheit
9/11” is honestly one of the best I’ve
seen. Unlike a lot of Moore’s earlier films,
there is a lot less ‘creative editing’
for the sake of getting his particular viewpoint
across. What he has done with this film, is pick
out certain ‘truths’ about the links
between the Bush and Bin Laden Family, the election
that put Bush, Jr. into the White House, and some
of the reasons why we invaded Iraq. He then carefully
presents the proof of his claims in a clear and
concise manner. He then goes further to show film
footage that the Bush administration would rather
you not see, which gives a somewhat clearer, and
less positive picture of what is actually going
on over in Iraq.
We are also given the opportunity to see the effects
of the war here in our own hometowns. Moore points
out how it always seems to be the nation’s
downtrodden that are the first to step up to defend
our country when they are called upon to do so.
Of course, this has been the case for years, and
is not something new to the Bush administration.
Probably the most poignant story involves a woman
from Moore’s home town of Flint, Michigan.
Like most Americans, she has to struggle to make
ends meets, and as her children grew she instilled
in them a respect for the military and taught
them how it could help them get a good education.
Unfortunately, one of her sons recently died in
the Iraq conflict, and we can feel her pain as
she reads a letter written by him just a few short
months before his death. She then travels to Washington
D.C. for a rally and is confronted by a person
who claims everything is staged. It is a heartbreaking
moment, and Moore keeps his camera on her to make
sure we fully understand what a tremendous loss
she has suffered.
I found this film to be less self-serving than
Moore’s earlier works. He shows up on camera
only a few times, and the humorous scenes are
kept to a minimum. In the past, comedy was kind
of his stock and trade and was occasionally overused.
“Fahrenheit 9/11” is such a somber
film, that the few laughs that are elicited are
welcome, indeed. If there were no moments to lighten
the mood, the sales of anti-depressant drugs would
surely go up after each showing of the film. But
even those moments are kept fairly short. The
few trademark stunts Moore pulls, like commandeering
an ice cream truck to read the Patriot Act in
the streets of Washington D.C. or his attempts
to get Congressmen to sign their children up for
the military are kept very short so as to not
overstay their welcome. The point is made, the
laughs come, and then the film moves on.
“Fahrenheit 9/11” makes a powerful
statement, and at times it is difficult to watch.
Images come and go that most of us would rather
not see, but in all good conscience we should
see them. From a pure technical standpoint, I
can find little or no fault in Moore’s film.
It is well crafted, moves well and certainly causes
a reaction from those who see it. If I were to
be on the board of the Academy of Motion Picture
Arts & Sciences, I would push to have “Fahrenheit
9/11” nominated for an Oscar, content notwithstanding.
I’ve been asked if there was anything I
didn’t like or agree with in the film, and
on the surface I would have to say no. But I would
like to say that I do have a contradictory feeling
about what Moore wants from his audience. And
here is where my personal feelings will come into
play again in this review. As I mentioned, Moore
wants you to see “Fahrenheit 9/11”
and leave the theatre with a feeling that you
definitely shouldn’t vote for Bush. On the
one hand, I applaud this stance because I don’t
want anyone to vote for Bush, either. However,
on a more realistic level it would seem more prudent
that people should see this film, pick out the
items that bother them the most, then go out and
do their own research. They should be pro-active,
instead of merely reactive.
I consider “Fahrenheit 9/11” to be
one of the most important films produced in recent
years. The controversy alone is causing discussions
about subjects that in the past were difficult
to talk about, and more significantly it stands
a real chance of getting the people of this country
off their butts to get out and vote. Regardless
of personal politics, everyone should take the
time to see it. How can you have an opinion if
you don’t?
Directed by: Michael Moore
Studio: Lion’s Gate / IFC Films
MPAA Rating: R
Website
We'll give Fahrenheit 9/11 an A+.
|
