The movie has all the thrills of the scene in the accusation parlor that comes at the end of every Agatha Christie novel. And, just as someone always stands up and says “that’s a fascinating story, Poirot, but it’s a pity you have no proof!” similarly Moore’s theory is fascinating and fits the facts, but I was left unconvinced. Which brings us to the two drawbacks of “Fahrenheit 9/11.” First, does anyone really take Michael Moore at face value? His Oscar-winning “Bowling for Columbine” has come under a lot of criticism for factual malfunctions and “Fahrenheit 9/11” is already sending up some flags. He fails to mention that the Washington Post's report that George II is on vacation 42% actually means that he was somewhere other than the White House, including his ranch and Camp David where presidents often meet world leaders and conduct business. More distracting are some of the rather large intuitive leaps he makes from facts to assumptions. Moore does not give us time to ponder the opposite assumption about the same fact, but he does have an awful lot of ground to cover in making a conspiracy theory that might strike some ears as—if I may use the same analogy twice—out of “JFK.” If all Moore says is true, then certainly these men need to go to jail. If it’s true.
I have a friend who treats Michael Moore no differently than any other movie. To him, the facts don’t need to be accurate at all as long as the movie is entertaining. My wife is peeved about Moore’s bending of the truth. My friend’s wife, according to him, does not like to see any movie that tries to convince her of anything (she loves “Old School”) EXCEPT what she already believes. So she loves Michael Moore. I’m not going to exhaustively research any of Moore’s data. I’m a sophisticated modern American…which means I’m inclined to distrust everything that comes my way, whether it comes from Moore or the president.
It’s difficult to make a factually airtight documentary. The only impenetrable documentary of recent years may be Errol Morris’ “The Fog of War.” That movie only has one fact: this is Robert McNamara’s view of the world. None of the figures and numbers presented in “The Fog of War” need to be accurate. They only need to be what McNamara says is accurate, because the movie isn’t about the facts of World War II and Vietnam, but the truth as seen by Bob McNamara. And as McNamara is spry and well enough to complain if he’s been misrepresented, and he has not complained at all, then we can only assume that he, the only place where the movie’s one fact can be disputed, is not claiming to have been misrepresented. Awesome movie, by the way.
“Fahrenheit 9/11’s” second shortcoming is that Moore the man has a personality like sandpaper. Even the old dude who does movie and restaurant reviews on the classical station described Moore as a “dork” after meeting him. That the conclusions he draws from facts are not the same conclusions someone else might draw from those facts is his prerogative. But does he have to be so snide about it? Much of his rhetoric, as he shows Bush and Rumseld in slow-motion while ominous music plays, is the cinematic equivalent of booger flicking. Still, his obnoxiousness is thankfully more toned down in this film than in “Bowling for Columbine.”
Will Moore swing the upcoming election? I doubt it. I doubt anyone will agree with him after the movie that didn’t agree with him before it. He is a serious person, a person who means what he says, and American elections are decided by moderates, by people in the middle who have no party affiliations. As they are the majority of the country, and as the majority of the country seems to prefer movies that are escapist or at best ambivalent, they probably won’t want to see “Fahrenheit 9/11” anyway. Maybe that’s too cynical of me. If I had to posit what movie will have the greatest effect on the election, it would be the DVD release of “Return of the King.” There’s a crowd-pleaser in which the whole family gets to sit down together to watch 3 ½ hours of being shown again and again (and again and again) that war is the solution and maybe we should keep this hawk in power.
Still, it’s only June and it’s been a terrific year for movies. We had an openly religious film make a big smash in the spring and now an openly political film, from the opposite end of the spectrum, is breaking box office records. Neither of these films is perfect, but they are more good than bad. I have nothing against escapism—I count “Raiders of the Lost Ark” and “Star Wars” among my favorite movies of all time—but it’s nice to see substance in the multiplex.
Finished June 29th, 2004
Copyright © 2004 Friday & Saturday Night
Page one of “Fahrenheit 9/11.” Back to home.