Sunday, October 31, 2004
Unfairenheit 9/11
Well, I did it. I finally saw Farenheit 9/11. I fully admit I didn’t have a completely open mind going into it, but I still think I can bring up some valid points.
Let me start by insulting most of my loyal readers: I believe most fans of this movie suffer from “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” syndrome. They hate Bush, this movie hates Bush, therefore the movie must be good. I was annoyed by the hype surrounding this movie (fully fueled by Moore), telling me it was “duty as an American” to go see it. Ya know, it is possible to both dislike Bush AND dislike the film.
Taking the politics out of it for a moment, as a stand-alone film F911 is OK. Not great, not terrible. I do respect the fact that we never actually see the World Trade Center in the film. But it lacks a lot of the really clever humor that Moore has used in the past both in movies and on TV.
It’s Moore’s political arguments that get him in trouble. Most of the movie is “bait and switch”: he sets you up to show how bad Bush is, but then uses “evidence” that proves a different point. Moore is counting on you not stopping to think for yourself.
Here’s an example: The Patriot Act certainly has some controversy, and you'd think if anyone could dig up abuses of it, it would be Michael Moore. So what does he come up with? First, he finds a deputy Sheriff in Fresno who infiltrated a peace group in Fresno. Did the Sheriff do background checks on the other members? No. Did he secretly videotape their meetings? No. All he did was use a fake name. That may be unethical, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the Patriot Act. The second example Moore uses is an old guy who was asked a few questions by the FBI because he was speaking out publicly against Bush. Did the FBI tap his phone? Install cameras in his living room? Did they bring him in for questioning? No. They paid him a visit because HIS OWN FRIENDS reported him as being suspicious. That may speak to the paranoia in the country, but again it has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PATRIOT ACT. Of
course, Michael Moore doesn't really care if it's relevant or not.
Moore mentions the "Coalition of the Willing", the countries that
backed Bush in the decision to invade Iraq. Moore lists a few of the
supporting countries such as Nicaraqua and Afghanistan, and makes fun
of Morocco for donating 3000 monkeys to detonate land mines. He
presents the coalition as being nothing but third world nations. He
doesn't want the audience to think for themselves, because if they did
they'd know that there were over 30 nations in the coalition including
the United Kingdom, Spain, Italy, Australia, and Japan. Oh, and I
forgot Poland.
I could go on and on.
Regardless of political affiliation, I believe the vast majority of
people will tell you they disapprove of negative campaign ads. Most of
those people are lying, because not only did they spend over $100
million dollars to see this 2-hour mudslinging commercial, they claim
they LIKED it.
|
Well, I did it. I finally saw Farenheit 9/11. I fully admit I didn’t have a completely open mind going into it, but I still think I can bring up some valid points.
Let me start by insulting most of my loyal readers: I believe most fans of this movie suffer from “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” syndrome. They hate Bush, this movie hates Bush, therefore the movie must be good. I was annoyed by the hype surrounding this movie (fully fueled by Moore), telling me it was “duty as an American” to go see it. Ya know, it is possible to both dislike Bush AND dislike the film.
Taking the politics out of it for a moment, as a stand-alone film F911 is OK. Not great, not terrible. I do respect the fact that we never actually see the World Trade Center in the film. But it lacks a lot of the really clever humor that Moore has used in the past both in movies and on TV.
It’s Moore’s political arguments that get him in trouble. Most of the movie is “bait and switch”: he sets you up to show how bad Bush is, but then uses “evidence” that proves a different point. Moore is counting on you not stopping to think for yourself.
Here’s an example: The Patriot Act certainly has some controversy, and you'd think if anyone could dig up abuses of it, it would be Michael Moore. So what does he come up with? First, he finds a deputy Sheriff in Fresno who infiltrated a peace group in Fresno. Did the Sheriff do background checks on the other members? No. Did he secretly videotape their meetings? No. All he did was use a fake name. That may be unethical, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the Patriot Act. The second example Moore uses is an old guy who was asked a few questions by the FBI because he was speaking out publicly against Bush. Did the FBI tap his phone? Install cameras in his living room? Did they bring him in for questioning? No. They paid him a visit because HIS OWN FRIENDS reported him as being suspicious. That may speak to the paranoia in the country, but again it has NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PATRIOT ACT. Of
course, Michael Moore doesn't really care if it's relevant or not.
Moore mentions the "Coalition of the Willing", the countries that
backed Bush in the decision to invade Iraq. Moore lists a few of the
supporting countries such as Nicaraqua and Afghanistan, and makes fun
of Morocco for donating 3000 monkeys to detonate land mines. He
presents the coalition as being nothing but third world nations. He
doesn't want the audience to think for themselves, because if they did
they'd know that there were over 30 nations in the coalition including
the United Kingdom, Spain, Italy, Australia, and Japan. Oh, and I
forgot Poland.
I could go on and on.
Regardless of political affiliation, I believe the vast majority of
people will tell you they disapprove of negative campaign ads. Most of
those people are lying, because not only did they spend over $100
million dollars to see this 2-hour mudslinging commercial, they claim
they LIKED it.
Permanent link
