There is an interesting phenomenon that seems to be happening to Moore's film: the older it gets, the more criticism it receives. Obviously, there were abundant critics upon its release, but more and more people seem to be pointing out faults with it, and less are seeing it as the wonderful documentary they originally hailed it as. A possible explanation for this may be that Fahrenheit 9/11 is a well-constructed anti-Bush film. Upon watching it, most people, who have limited knowledge of the government's actions concerning September 11th (myself included), find it hard to disagree with Moore. The manner in which he presents his arguments, and the various techniques he employs have mesmerized and persuaded many an audience member. A perfect example of this occurs toward the beginning, when he presents footage of the World Trade Center shortly after being hit-- but leaves the screen blank. By removing this important element, he enhances our perception of the screams and cries for help, the same way a blind person's remaining senses become augmented. Moore also uses humor effectively throughout, especially when pointing out the faults with the Bush administration. He throws a lot of information at the audience, but he keeps viewers interested by utilizing numerous comical devices, such as the Gunsmoke reference and his use of rock songs (particularly the Go-Go's "Vacation"). Also, Moore focuses on a lot of flaws inherent in the government, including Congresses' inability to read the bills it passes, and the dubious Threat Level. Finally, Moore's on-screen presence is a significant contribution even though his stunts are somewhat illusory in proving a point. For example, it is unlikely that anyone would sign their children up for military service if suddenly approached on the street, and it really is not surprising that the Congressman Moore talks with are standoffish. However, his point is obvious and the way he expresses it is unique and effective nonetheless.
Moore may very well have misrepresented aspects of 9/11, but he made a damn good film. He set out to convince people of his beliefs, and the countless techniques he employed helped to achieve that goal.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
That's an interesting possibility, Eric -- that people are generally more critical of Moore's film as time goes on. It's always worth considering how a film is viewed differently over time -- these works are not statically received and perhaps always depend on context. A young person watching 'Fahrenheit 9/11' 2o years from now may feel absolutely no connection at all to the events of 2001 and after -- and thus respond differently, perhaps less emotionally , to the film -- though it was released in an intense political cauldron.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, I'm not sure how to gauge people's responses now in general -- I do remember some intense antagonism toward Moore when the film was released (though on the whole it did very well).