[grimm]

Originally posted by Colin@Jun 24 2004, 08:05 AM
Know what's funny? Stuff like this only HELPS Michael Moore's movie. I am in awe of the Michael Moore promotion machine as is. They are able to take any news story involving him and turn it into a conspiracy against Moore. It's most impressive. Yesterday's debut on two screens in New York was billed as a record-breaking day (it was for those two theaters). Nice headlines followed on that. Clever.

It's amusing how much keeps getting handed to him by his "opposition".

Roger Ebert's review


FAHRENHEIT 9/11 / ***1/2 ®

June 24, 2004

Lions Gate/IFC Films presents a documentary directed by Michael Moore.
Narrated by Moore. Running time: 110 minutes. Rated R (some violent
and disturbing images, and for language).

BY ROGER EBERT

Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" is less an expose of George W. Bush
than a dramatization of what Moore sees as a failed and dangerous
presidency. The charges in the film will not come as news to those who
pay attention to politics, but Moore illustrates them with dramatic
images and a relentless commentary track that essentially concludes
Bush is incompetent, dishonest, failing in the war on terrorism, and
has bad taste in friends.

Although Moore's narration ranges from outrage to sarcasm, the most
devastating passage in the film speaks for itself. That's when Bush,
who was reading My Pet Goat to a classroom of Florida children, is
notified of the second attack on the World Trade Center, and yet
lingers with the kids for almost seven minutes before finally leaving
the room. His inexplicable paralysis wasn't underlined in news reports
at the time, and only Moore thought to contact the teacher in that
schoolroom -- who, as it turned out, had made her own video of the
visit. The expression on Bush's face as he sits there is odd indeed.

Bush, here and elsewhere in the film, is characterized as a man who
owes a lot to his friends, including those who helped bail him out of
business ventures. Moore places particular emphasis on what he sees as
a long-term friendship between the Bush family (including both
presidents) and powerful Saudi Arabians. More than $1.4 billion in
Saudi money has flowed into the coffers of Bush family enterprises, he
says, and after 9/11 the White House helped expedite flights out of
the country carrying, among others, members of the bin Laden family
(which disowns its most famous member).

Moore examines the military records released by Bush to explain his
disappearance from the Texas Air National Guard, and finds that the
name of another pilot has been blacked out. This pilot, he learns, was
Bush's close friend James R. Bath, who became Texas money manager for
the billionaire bin Ladens. Another indication of the closeness of the
Bushes and the Saudis: The law firm of James Baker, the secretary of
State for Bush's father, was hired by the Saudis to defend them
against a suit by a group of 9/11 victims and survivors, who charged
that the Saudis had financed al-Qaida.

To Moore, this is more evidence that Bush has an unhealthy
relationship with the Saudis, and that it may have influenced his
decision to go to war against Iraq at least partially on their behalf.
The war itself Moore considers unjustified (no WMDs, no Hussein-bin
Laden link), and he talks with American soldiers, including amputees,
who complain bitterly about Bush's proposed cuts of military salaries
at the same time he was sending them into a war that they (at least,
the ones Moore spoke to) hated.

Moore also shows American military personnel who are apparently
enjoying the war; he has footage of soldiers who use torture
techniques not in a prison but in the field, where they hood an Iraqi
prisoner, call him "Ali Baba" and pose for videos while touching his
genitals.

Moore brings a fresh impact to familiar material by the way he
marshals his images. We are all familiar with the controversy over the
2000 election, which was settled by the U.S. Supreme Court. What I
hadn't seen before was footage of the ratification of Bush's election
by the U.S. Congress. An election can be debated at the request of one
senator and one representative; 10 representatives rise to challenge
it, but not a single senator. As Moore shows the challengers, one
after another, we cannot help noting that they are eight black women,
one Asian woman and one black man. They are all gaveled into silence
by the chairman of the joint congressional session -- Vice President
Al Gore. The urgency and futility of the scene reawakens old feelings
for those who believe Bush is an illegitimate president.

"Fahrenheit 9/11" opens on a note not unlike Moore's earlier films,
such as "Roger & Me" and "Bowling for Columbine." Moore, as narrator,
brings humor and sarcasm to his comments, and occasionally appears
onscreen in a gadfly role. It's vintage Moore, for example, when he
brings along an unsuspecting Marine recruiter as he confronts
congressmen, urging them to have their children enlist in the service.
And he makes good use of candid footage, including an eerie video
showing Bush practicing facial expressions before going live with his
address to the nation about 9/11.

Apparently Bush and other members of his administration don't know
what every TV reporter knows, that a satellite image can be live
before they get the cue to start talking. That accounts for the
quease-inducing footage of Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz
wetting his pocket comb in his mouth before slicking back his hair.
When that doesn't do it, he spits in his hand and wipes it down. If
his mother is alive, I hope for his sake she doesn't see this film.

Such scenes are typical of vintage Moore, catching his subjects off
guard. But his film grows steadily darker, and Moore largely
disappears from it, as he focuses on people such as Lila Lipscomb,
from Moore's hometown of Flint, Mich.; she reads a letter from her
son, written days before he was killed in Iraq. It urges his family to
work for Bush's defeat.

"Fahrenheit 9/11" is a compelling, persuasive film, at odds with the
White House effort to present Bush as a strong leader. He comes across
as a shallow, inarticulate man, simplistic in speech and inauthentic
in manner. If the film is not quite as electrifying as Moore's
"Bowling for Columbine," that may be because Moore has toned down his
usual exuberance and was sobered by attacks on the factual accuracy of
elements of "Columbine"; playing with larger stakes, he is more
cautious here, and we get an op-ed piece, not a stand-up routine. But
he remains one of the most valuable figures on the political
landscape, a populist rabble-rouser, humorous and effective; the
outrage and incredulity in his film are an exhilarating response to
Bush's determined repetition of the same stubborn sound bites.