|
Interesting take by Variety's lead film critic, Todd McCarthy -- as if he wanted it to be an even more decisive case against Shrub:
Fahrenheit 9/11
(Docu -- Competing)
A Dog Eat Dog and Wild Bunch presentation. (International sales: Wild Bunch, Paris.) Produced by Jim Czarnecki, Kathleen Glynn, Michael Moore. Co-producers, Jeff Gibbs, Kurt Engfehr. Supervising producer, Tia Lessin. Directed, written by Michael Moore.
By TODD MCCARTHY
'Fahrenheit 9/11' helmer Michael Moore talks with Lila Lipscomb, mother of a soldier killed in Iraq.
Its title notwithstanding, Michael Moore has delivered a film rather less incendiary than might have been expected -- or wished for by his fans -- in "Fahrenheit 9/11." Designed as an indictment of the Bush administration's domestic and international policies since the 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, D.C., the sporadically effective docu trades far more in emotional appeals than in systematically building an evidence-filled case against the president and his circle. Thanks to Moore's celebrity, project has been a publicity magnet since its inception, which assures plenty of continued media attention on the ramp up to its intended July U.S. release by an as-yet-to-be-determined distributor, as well as hefty returns both theatrically and in DVD/homevid release in October, a month before the election.
Pic fails to provide any hard facts or make any incriminating connections that a reasonably informed person doesn't already know about, so intellectually Moore is largely preaching to the converted in this blatant cinematic 2004 campaign pamphlet.
Due to the way Moore has skewed his account to emphasize blacks, other minorities and the poor as the primary domestic victims of Bush's policies, it would seem that the groups the filmmaker primarily hopes to influence in November are the disenfranchised who don't normally turn out to vote in large numbers, and "patriotic" Middle Americans who might be convinced not to automatically vote Republican. In these respects, he might prove somewhat successful due to the emotionalism of his pitch.
It may then be of secondary importance that much of the film is constructed of recycled parts drawn mostly from television, and that it reveals Moore as an inadequate prosecuting attorney when it comes to collecting evidence, rationally laying out his argument and delivering the coup de grace in a masterly summation. Instead, his approach is scattershot and manipulative, his tone derisive, jokey and snide in regard to the administration and media, but earnest when it comes to regular folk.
If one agrees with Moore's politics -- and indeed, even if one doesn't but longs for the professional gadfly to give Bush his best shot -- there must be some disappointment that Moore hasn't made better use of his ample materials and various witnesses who appear to have the goods on the administration, the Saudis and other matters. One has the feeling there's a lot more beneath the surface that will eventually come out, but that Moore, in his haste to get this film done before the election, hasn't gotten it.
<snip>
more at the sub site, www.variety.com
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
