Tuesday, June 29, 2004

We went to see "Fahrenheit 9/11" last night. It wasn't what I expected. I don't really even know how to explain why I was disappointed - it was obviously one-sided and scathing, and I expected that. I agree with the premise that we went to Iraq for all the wrong reasons and, most likely, under false pretenses. But one comment that Alex (who was really offended by the movie) made really stuck with me - he pointed out that Moore's film was every bit as manipulative as the behavior that he was depicting (the behavior of the Bush administration). I was especially bothered by the "shock" effect of dead babies, napalmed women, etc., set to music and following the shots of US soldiers talking about getting psyched for combat. To demonize the soldiers was especially repulsive. I know that people have strong feelings about politics in general, and for some, very strong feelings about this movie, so I'm going to stop here. It's too big an animal for a little blog.

I read a blurb in the local paper today about a 58-year old woman here in Boulder county, who was arrested for stalking her priest, giving him unsolicited gifts and professing her love for him. She told the sheriff's deputies that she and the priest were going to be married. The reason that it jumped out at me is that she is the same age and has the same name as a woman I used to work with in LA, who was definitely stalker material. This woman used to hit on all the male employees, even the married ones, and one of them once told me that she had imagined an entire dimension to their relationship that didn't actually exist. How weird would it be if she moved out here as well, and now I'm reading about her?? Spooky.


Anonymous said...

...hmmmm. So what are 'we' suppose to do to get the real message out to the populace? The far right chips away at us by feeding us dis-information tiny bits at a time, where we end up saying ' I guess it's not so bad'. Every time the left reacts to such manipulative statements the cry 'damn liberal media!', or 'you are un-american!', or 'he is the President, we need to back him unconditionally!'. Thus continues the war of words. I think images and drama is a good way to slap back those who have us believing what 'they' tell us. Don't be upset at Moore, be upset at, or sympathise with, the people he talks to.

This is not a 'nice & easy' war that the media would have us believe. Why wait until after it is finished to hear about all the injustices that occured? We need to know what is really going on now and make sure 'they' know we are watching.

"Shocked"? you should be shocked that our kids are listening to metal music while mowing down what we hope are enemy combatants. War should not be like a video game. That is disgusting. He did not 'deamonize' the soldiers, he showed tham as stupid idiots without honor or empathy.


Big animal indeed.

(Mike M.)

Anonymous said...

Your comment that Moore's film was manipulative - well, this is Moore's take on the Bush administration and the war in Iraq. Documentaries by their very nature are subject to the creator's whims. It would be one dull-ass movie if it bent over backwards to accommodate all sides, or debated the Bush spin tit for tat. Does that make it bad? No - it's just one man's opinion. It may have made you feel bad to see the horrors of war, and the US soldiers psyched up but that's the truth about war. In my mind, that's exactly what is good about this film - it questions just exactly what the Iraq war was about. The movie never loses sight of the regular folks (Americans and Iraqis) who have been suffering the most from this conflict. But then again - I'm just a Canadian, and we just voted to keep our Liberal government :)

Mags said...

My post may not have come off quite the way I heard it in my head, so let me clarify - I liked the film. I appreciate Michael Moore as a filmmaker, and I dont' think there is another filmmaker alive who could have made this film, who could have gained access to documents and senators and footage to make this movie. I wasn't interested in watching a balanced, nice & easy, "let both sides have their say" kind of film. I think that everyone who sees this movie is touched personally by specific parts, and then they feel very strongly about those parts. I'm not trying to be critical of what anyone else thought when they saw it, but that for me, there were parts that offended me by their depiction. Does this mean that I disagree w/ Moore's premise? Of course not. But I can appreciate the movie as a whole, and think that it's an important film, while still taking issue with it.