Tuesday, June 21, 2016

982. Fahrenheit 9/11

Fahrenheit 9/11
Directed by Michael Moore

I have been too depressed to discuss politics lately, given the current climate in the US right now.  However, I will briefly break my cranky silence and talk about Fahrenheit 9/11.

Basically, Michael Moore does his best to convince us in two hours that the Bush administration exploited the 9/11 tragedy in order to push forward their own corrupt agenda.   Moore alleges that the events like the signing of the Patriot Act or the footage of the US abuse towards prisoners are all evidence of an unlawful system.

So this is a rather scary film and skillfully presented that it is hard to visualize the other side of the argument.  I always take Moore's films with a grain of salt, but this truthfully shook me to my chore.  I have ranted so many times in the past week that I have no more rant to give.  But sometimes the fact that I am a US citizen scares me.

Easily Moore's most upsetting documentary yet.  And I thought Columbine would be unbeatable.

RATING: ****-

Interesting Facts:

First documentary to debut at number one at the box office.

Banned in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.


  1. I've recent watched 'Sicko' and it's paeon to our NHS.

    Just thought I'd use that as a starter to this reply ...

    OK, Michael, I'm sure most observers and commentators here on Amanda's blog are basically on your side .. But please .. sometimes you do more harm than good. Facts and figures.. and more importantly quotes taken out of context and used to twist things to suit you (OK, our, agenda.. not good. It leaves you .. OK, us, open to valid criticism from the Trumps of this world.

    It's a great film, it's very powerful .. but sadly I find myself not entirely convinced I can trust you, and that's a crying shame.. as I'm sure 90% of what you want to say is correct and valid..

    1. Agreed! And honestly I think the facts he does quote are shocking enough. He doesn't need to embellish or take things out of context.

  2. "Facts and figures.. and more importantly quotes taken out of context and used to twist things to suit you [...] leaves you [...] open to valid criticism from the Trumps of this world"

    Yep, definitely Trump is always worried about facts & context.

    Seen from the Europe, this documentary seems a little pointless. Are you, americans, still discussing if the invassion of Irak was motivated by greed? For us, it was so obvious from start that we didn't feel documentaries like this were necessary.

    1. That is a bit of a sweeping statement for the whole continent!

    2. It's a bit of a sweeping statement about two whole continents (less Canada).

      Somewhere between the ill-informed idea that it was a moral crusade to remove a Bad Man and the equally ill-informed opposite idea that it was all about stealing oil, there are more complex and nuanced assessments. To be fair, this film follows neither lazy extreme (although it does naturally attack the former myth the most as it was the more dominant at the time) but looks into how 9/11 was used as an opportunity and how the PR was massaged. I think that was interesting at the time and is still interesting today even if the set of facts contained are now old news.

      And it gets some laughs at the expense of George W Bush. Do you remember when we all thought that he was as bad as it could possibly get? Oh, what naive little children we were...

  3. Dessi, mind that I said "greed" not "oil". Whether it was for geostrategy, territorial dominance, personal gain or power balance, what was clear from start it's that they didn't have the freedom of iraki people, Al-Qaeda or the WMD threat in mind when they decided to invade Irak.

    And it may be a sweeping statement but the truth is there:

    1. It's a film blog so I wasn't trying to challenge anyone's views of the actual war (Never talk about politics or religion in polite society). Just saying that I thought the film did have something interesting to say and in some ways still does.

      A majority view can be 51% (or, to take the largest related number in the article, 57% of Germans) but in order to make a sweeping statement stick, you've got to have something like 80% or 90%, haven't you? I suppose that's a philosophical question. It may appear at times like America was all behind the war, but this film won the People's Choice award for best movie that year, so there must have been a fair swell of war opposition there.

      I'd also speculate that a lot of the establishment media support was more because it's less culturally acceptable in America to criticise the army or the flag, particularly in times of trouble (which the country felt in the aftermath of the unprecedented 9/11 attacks). See for example the current kneeling controversy in the NFL, which is inexplicable to someone like me who couldn't care less whether my anthem gets sung even when the national team is playing. Probably some of our stateside contributors can assess that better than you or I.

  4. I probably should spare my rants for less public forums (though I would love to discuss this all with you individually). You can probably guess my views on 99% of things anyway. We had another mass shooting yesterday and my heart is hurting.