2004



June 29, 2004
Oakridge
USA
English
122 minutes

The Temperature Where Freedom Burns -- FAHRENHEIT 9/11.

I've spent several dozen hours both before and after seeing this film reading the many opinions about what exactly this film means, what it is and isn't, who's on what side of the issue, etc. I've read the Hitchens and the Slate and seen the New York Post guy on TV and listened to Ebert and Roeper talk about the greatness. I've read the National Review's take and David Brooks' Op Ed New York Times tongue-in-cheek rant. Tonight I will read the Entertainment Weekly cover story and tomorrow I'll probably watch the Charlie Rose interview. This melding of politics and film is too exciting for me to avoid. After all, while living in DC I actually ordered a pizza for my roommates and I to eat while watching the NAFTA debates on CSPAN.

I've also heard from people who used to work on Michael Moore's crew, back before Columbine, who told me what a complete asshole he is.

But none of that matters to me. I consider him a national treasure. I have every episode of every TV show he's ever done. I've watched him force an insurance company to give a guy a life-saving transplant. I've seen the Christmas Voicebox Choir sing at the Phillip Morris offices. I've seen him fill a boat up with black and latin people and then storm the beaches of Connecticut. I am not a gullible person. Michael Moore is a hero to me, despite, or perhaps because of, his ability to piss so many people off.

I don't throw out all of what he said in BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE because he craftily edited the scenes for stronger effect. Filmmakers do this all the time. I know he didn't walk into a bank and walk out with a gun four minutes later. I'm not stupid. In this film, he shows an Iraqi boy flying a kite in the sunshine the day before we began bombing, and then shows an angry grandmother standing over rubble the day after. Of course it wasn't summer camp before we got there. And of course we didn't target that grandmother's family.

People are to the point now that they're mad that he implies so much without saying it. He puts pictures on the screen, speaks only in complete truths, except when he's clearly being ironic or using his own opinions, and lets us decide. Are the people who are against this film so afraid that we can't decide for ourselves? Give us a bit more credit.

I realize that a Congressman cannot sign his son or daughter up to go serve in Iraq. I realize that before appearing on TV, politicians need to get hair and makeup done. I realize that this film cannot be called a documentary and Moore has said as much himself. Moore has the camera. He gets to decide what goes in it.

I've heard Moore's quotes when he speaks to European audiences. Much of his humor doesn't come across on paper. He's called Americans "stupid" and called the terrorists "freedom fighters".

To the first point I give you the scene in this film when he visits the small town in Virginia, I believe, that was mistakenly announced as a terrorist target. The response he got when asking what exactly the terrorists might hit in their small town, more than one resident says "they could hit the Wal-Mart". Yeah. An Islamic extremist is planning to attack a rural Wal-Mart for maximum terror effect. I would, however, substitute Moore's quote of "stupid" with "narcissistic". Whenever the terror alert is raised, every local newscast begins speculating on which local building or bridge is atop the list of targets. Get over yourselves, people. They will not be at your 4th of July parade.

To the "freedom fighter" thing. Get out a history book and look at how the Colonists won the American Revolution. By being terrorists. By hiding in trees, instead of marching in formation. By quick strikes instead of planned and announced attacks. By sometimes wearing the clothing of the other side.

Putting all that manipulation stuff aside, it's an interesting and funny film. He makes people look stupid. Both the powerful, like Rummy and Cheney and Bush, and the not-so-powerful, like the woman who sticks her foot in her mouth in the park across from the Whitehouse.

The free ride this president has gotten from the people and the press is really remarkable. Especially in the aftermath of Clinton who was nearly ruined along with the very office of President, simply for getting a blowjob in the oval office from someone who wasn't his wife. The difference between the hatred of Clinton and the forgiveness of Bush is something I still simply can't fathom.

Bush's combination of arrogance and dimwittedness is something I hope to never see again in my lifetime.

But what about the film? Go see it. If you hate Moore and the left, you'll find much ammunition here. If you hate Bush and the right, you'll cheer as you finally hear someone echo your thoughts. If you aren't either, you'll enjoy an entertaining fact-filled movie, and be able to talk about it at your next cocktail party.

There are parts of it that infuriated me towards Moore. He shows great restraint in not showing us the planes hit the Towers, instead having the screen stay black. But a moment later, while showing Bush stunned and unmoving as he helps read that book to the schoolchildren, he can't keep his mouth shut. These shots of Bush sitting there for nine minutes, doing nothing are powerful and scary. Moore didn't need any voiceover at all, much less one that says "what is he thinking?"

Will it change your mind? Probably not. But think for a moment. If just one of the many allegations against Bush is true, wouldn't that warrant some sort of investigation?

7.5 Critical Consensus
***^ Ebert
**^ Berardinelli
***^ Gleiberman
**** LaSalle
**^ Lumenick