Review 1:

Fahrenheit 9/11:

I went to see this last week, but am only getting around to writing about it now. The style is the same as Bowling for Columbine. Simple, bite-size pieces that quite often come too quickly to be digested fully in the time provided. Or maybe I'm just thick.

I found the first half about the influence of the Saudis on the US economy something of an eye-opener. To some more jaded political commentators this is probably old hat, but it was news to me. The second half was very effective. To my mind, one feature of these documentaries is that they are an effective antidote to the glamour of war movies that have been doing the rounds since God-knows-when. Corpses in real-life are not a pretty sight, and there was very little, if any, heroism involved in the US army's intervention. The scene where the Iraqi woman lamented the bombing of her house invited nothing but sympathy, unless you were a fan of Toby Keith.

At this point I have to be cynical, and question Moore's utilisation of Lila Lipscombe's tragedy. I found that she came across very well, and her heartbreak was gut-wrenching, but when she broke down, towards the end of the film, Moore should have turned the camera OFF! That kind of grief, at least in my opinion, should not be shared on camera with someone who up until recently, never knew her. I have no problem with seeing it; It was a validation of human emotion in many ways, but Michael Moore's refusal to waste a good photo opportunity was evident. But God, my heart goes out to that woman.

The backlash against Moore is now in full swing, and to be sure there are elements of his style to take issue with, but these are outweighed by the fact that his voice, all in all, makes for effective dissent. There are some points that should be made:

1. He's biased against Bush.

Can anyone find any sane, balanced, politically aware person who isn't? He's on his way to trashing the environment (cf. Kyoto Protocol), posturing hypocritically against recreational drugs (His imprisonment of a single mother for twenty years for possession of marijuana, oh don't get me started!), and selling out the US presidency to a sizeable portion of Corporate America. Oh, and then there's his IQ: Hours upon HOURS of private tuition at an Iveagh League university just for him to barely pass his exams (after having often repeated an academic year) followed by one wasted business opportunity after another. Is it too much to ask that the President of the United States have a proper command of English?

I've never seen so many unite against one American president in all my life. Most presidents suffer criticism only from political scientists and commentators from the extreme left or right, but Bush is disrespected by EVERYONE! I remember seeing the anti-war protest marches in Dublin (I went), and for the first time I saw parents and children marching side by side in an event that wasn't organised against divorce or abortion. He's united several warring factions against him. No mean feat, eh?

2. His presentation of the facts is simplistic, and caters to the lowest-common-denominator.

This is the way to go. Most of us who work outside of the field of politics/journalism simply don't have the time to brush up on the finer points of the subject matter presented here, and even if we did, we'd most likely pass out with boredom before our quest for knowledge would be complete. Some aspects of politics can be interesting, but most of the finer points of it...well... let's just say only stock exchange economics has the greater power to induce a deep coma. Moore's success lies in the fact that he highlights the human interest behind it all, even if he has a tendency to manipulate it to some degree.

3. His conclusions are flawed.

Some historians have already pointed this out, and I can't really blame them. But at the same time, most of his facts are supported by evidence. His criticism of Bush is, in and of itself, a noble endeavour. He was guilty of such a conclusion in Bowling for Columbine (US paranoia cannot possibly be down to televison news stories on their own), but what's to stop us from drawing our own, given what he has presented?

4. If he's 'down with the people', why is he living in an exclusive Manhattan apartment?

Why shouldn't he enjoy the fruits of his labour?

5. His waistline is expanding along with his success.

Oh, grow the fuck up.


So that's it. All in all, I'd recommend it. Also, michaelmoore.com is very necessary reading after the film. I found the array of facts bewildering, and hard to keep up with, but they're all repeated here in the same sequence as the film.

So, Michael. Keep on keepin' on. Albeit with some more discretion and subtlety.

Lila, you have my deepest sympathies. I hope the rest of your life goes as well as can be expected for you and your family.

George, I really really really hope you lose the next election. And that's coming from an Irishman with no vested interests in American Politics.

Goodnight.