Happy 4th of July!!!
To combat my neverending boredom, I went to see Fahrenheit 9/11. First I was pamphleted by the local Kerry supporters, who will be a topic of discussion by themselves at a later date.
Just to identify an possible bias, I had to keep reminding myself to watch the movie without filtering it thru any pre-conceived ideas I might have been exposed to. The following is a quote from me in Nov 1990 regarding the 1st Gulf War.
Greig, an Army reservist, said, "The U.S. wants to control oil. People are going to die to keep oil at $40 a barrel, and I don't think that's right." - Morning Call, 11/12/90
What I asked the reporter to include, because I was in the Active Reserves, and he agreed to and still left out was that even though I didn't agree with the war I would still go and do the job my country asked of me. I would do it freely. That is a soldier's lot in life. I don't buy these cowards who try to get out of it because they only signed up for the college money. When you join the service, you take an oath no less than two times to defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign or domestic. I'm getting old, but I don't remember anything about "just for the college money".
Anyway, I digress, but I wanted you to know that I have had my problems with Daddy Bush's policies.
Back to the movie. I realize, and I hope everyone else does to, that all you get is Michael Moore's opinion of what he THINKS happened. There are things that, at face value, leave me with more questions than answers. As a filmmaker, there were a few things that stuck with me. Moore seems to claim that Bush conspired to keep America in a state of artificial fear for the purpose of our emotional support for the war. I would argue that uses the same tactic in his film. He marches out the mother, who lost her son in Iraq, no less than 3 times. Her last appearance at the tail end of the film is an emotionally painful venting in front of the White House. I am not saying this woman's pain is artificial, I can't fathom losing a loved one halfway around the world without being able to say goodbye. What I suggest is that the placement of this woman's pain in the film is as agredious a useage of emotion as the one he claims Bush perpetrated on the American public. When you first meet the woman and you find out that she has had two of her children in the military, why doesn't he mention then that her son died in a helicopter crash? I suggest it made more of an impact at the end of the film when you (the audience) take that recent memory with you.
Just remember that nothing that ever winds up on the screen (except for the live feed) is accidental. Every word, frame, or sound bite is placed in a specific order for a reason. The task you the viewer has is to try and realize the point the filmmaker is trying to make. I found myself laughing at several things during the film. Often it was a chagrined laugh at the use of off-air comments, eye rolls, and quirky things that members of the Bush administration made. It was a cheap joke and that was what I found amusing, that Moore had to resort to that for a laugh.
Some of his points seemed to be that American troops are disheartened by their duties in Iraq, Bush spent 42% of his 1st 8 months on vacation, and that the military unfairly targets poor black citizens for military service. As for the disheartened soldiers, I would expect that there were just as many soldiers in draft era World War 2 that were disturbed by the sheer horror and disgust with war. War has never been a pretty thing. Just or unjust warfare is a society's young throwing them themselves into a meat grinder. It's body parts, blood, and seeing innocents and not-so innocents torn apart. That kind of power and experience changes you. It has to. I was fortunate to not have to experience killing another human being, but I did come within a 1/16th of an inch of killing another human being. The details are not overly important other than that I was starring in this mans face long enough to remember every detail 18 years later. All it took was the appropriate order and that man would no longer have been alive. As it were, it still took me quite awhile to get over the "power" I possessed in the tip of my right index finger. It's disturbing to look down a rifle and see another human face there.
Moore also makes light of Bush on vacation. He considers Camp David to be a place where the President kicks off his shoes and orders Dominoes Pizza. One of the pictures he used of Camp David, shows the President with Tony Blair. I can imagine they weren't sitting around watching The Sopranos. Moore claims that Bush and his cronies were never-ending in their planning of this upcoming war, but also says that he took 42% of his 1st 8 months off. Which is it Michael?
He states that Bush didn't send enough troops into Afghanistan, but too many to Iraq. That seems like a lot of armchair quaterbacking.
As for military service attracting our poor and, in Moore's words, specifically black youth, military has always since the beginning of time attracted the poor. Look at the ancient Greek, Roman, and British armies and you'll find foot soldier ranks were dominated by the poor of their society. This is not a new idea brought on by the Bush administration. Yours truly was also a poor WHITE kid who joined the Army for 8 years.
There are a few other things that stuck with me, but the last one I will get into here tonight is Moore's claim that Bush really went after Iraq because Saddam tried to kill his father. Well to be honest, it was Clinton who launched cruise missiles at Iraq after the plot was uncovered.
As I said earlier this movie is Moore's opinion of what happened. It's a point of view and that's what is required for a narrative documentary. But if you leave out absolutely everything that might give your "narrative" a problem and only use information that might support it, and you don't even care that one part contradicts the next, and you give no chance to those who might differ, then you are a sloppy documentarian. If you feel the need to only flatter your potential audience, I might add, you are patronizing them and insulting them. This is the main issue I take up with Moore, he's a sloppy craftsman.
