FAHRENHEIT 9/11
US, 2004, 119 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Michael Moore.
Everybody knows Michael Moore. After the success and Oscar of Bowling for Columbine and the media hype for him and the film, he looms large as a documentary film-maker. Even George Bush and Congress members recognize him immediately. Not that Mr Bush will want to see much of him, because this is a highly (highly) critical portrait of the president, his initially care-less administration and the aftermath of 9/11 leading to the terrifying of the American people about terrorist threats and the decision to invade Iraq. A very large agenda for a two hour film.
It is engrossing. While many might criticize Moore's stances and his particular bias, there is a great deal of information in the film which needs to be considered, not ignored or dismissed. The images of the election results of 2000, Congress protests without any Senator signing speeches as required, the long vacations of the president up to August 2001, his initial inactivity on hearing the news of the September 11th crashes, the business links with the Saudi royal family, the evacuation of the Bin Laden relatives on Sept 13th, 2001, raise all kinds of questions about the president. When the film moves to the creation of a terror atmosphere during 2001-2002, Moore gives evidence, quotes media programs, interviews people on the street.
Finally, Iraq. Familiar material by now but telling nonetheless. Had the news about the torture come out while Moore was making his film, there would have been some more fairly devastating material. As it is, he moves towards the more personal, the loss of American life. He visits his home town of Flint and talks with some of the bereaved.
One caveat. Moore lets himself down concerning the coalition against Iraq. He offers some visual jokes mentioned countries like Palau and Morocco who joined but there is nothing about the UK except one send-up image of Tony Blair. There is nothing about Spain, the opposition of France, Germany or Russia or the situation with United Nations resolutions. This would have given much more depth to his treatment of the war – or does Moore confine himself to Americans only?
When released, this film could have a powerful influence on people making up their minds in the US for the November 2004 elections.
1. Michael Moore’s reputation? Popularity? His previous films? His confrontative method of interviewing?
2. The issues of 2004, the aftermath of 9/11? The title? The reference to temperature – and Fahrenheit 451 and books bursting into flame? Fahrenheit 9/11 and the US bursting into flame? The rest of the world, terrorism, Iraq, Afghanistan?
3. Michael Moore’s perspective, critical, very American, the true patriot – but critical of the Bush administration? His desire to expose the truth? To the broad American citizenship? Abroad? The political aim in the election year of 2004 to defeat President Bush?
4. The American issues, the opening, the scenario about the election of 2000, for the success of Al Gore, for the defeat of Bush? The real scenario? The speeches of protest in Congress – without any senator supporting the house members? The racial composition of those who protested? The perception in Florida that it was a racist recount? The people in charge of the recount, the connections with the Bush family? The Governor of Florida? The supervisor of the recount? The members of the Supreme Court and their decision?
5. The focus on President Bush in himself, the election, the experience of 9/11, the fearmongering? The opening and he and his cabinet being prepared for their television appearances?
6. 2001, the inauguration, the dangers and fears for Bush? His work in government, his long holidays, interviewed on his ranch, fishing and golf? Saying that he was doing some work and it was easy to do it outside Washington?
7. The attack of 9/11 and Moore’s use of a blank and black screen rather than show the visuals again? The soundtrack, the filming of reactions and dismay? President Bush, at the school, his continuing the interview at the school, spelling, reading the children’s book, his inactivity – and Michael Moore speculating about what he might have been thinking – or should have been thinking?
8. Moore’s presentation of the Saudi Arabian connections with the Bush family? The Saudi ambassador, his being nicknamed a member of the Bush family, the interview with Larry King? The information of the plane out of the US with the over twenty members of the Bin Laden family? Questions about authorising this? The slow response of the administration, especially to the investigation of Bin Laden, of the terrorists themselves? So many being Saudi terrorists? The role of Bin Laden? The information coming in, its being ignored, especially John Ashcroft (and his patriotic song)? Condoleezza Rice?
9. The Homeland legislation, people not reading it, the observations of members of Congress? Its draconian powers? The man at the gym, his remarks, the FBI coming to his house? An FBI agent infiltrating the peace group in Fresno? The overreaction?
10. The commentators, their critique of the administration, their authority and credibility, lawyers, politicians, members of the defence services? The information being given to the audience – no matter what the perspective, for its being assessed?
11. The history of the Bush family and its business connections, especially with the Saudis, Saudi investment? Bush’s own personal failures in business? His being a member of boards? The other members and the interlinking of financial and political interests?
12. The creation of the fear strategy in 2001 and 2002, Christmas 2001, the media, the news items, interviewing people in the street – and their fears, expectations of terrorist attacks, anywhere, even in the smallest town? Part of the White House strategy for their dealing with the situation, preparation for Afghanistan, for Iraq?
13. The focus on Iraq, the verbal and official connections with Al Qaeda? Guilt by association? The issues of Iraq, the memories of the Gulf War, the attitudes towards George Bush senior, his electoral defeat? The issue of weapons of mass destruction – the clips from Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice and others and others at the beginning of 2001? Their change of attitude in 2002? The war in Afghanistan, the bombings? The issue of the Coalition – Moore omitting all reference to the Coalition except the jocose reference to Tony Blair in the parody of The Magnificent Seven? The jokes about Palau and Morocco? The absence of any information about the British, the opposition from Germany and France, and Russia, other allies including Australia and Spain?
14. The switching in the focus of the film to Iraq, March 19, 2003, ordinary and peaceful life in Baghdad? The filming of the bombs, the destructions? The role of the military, the Americans, the reasons? Bush and his praising of the soldiers and their patriotism?
15. Patriotism, the soldiers, the growing casualties, the civilian injuries in Iraq, the soldiers not knowing why they were there…?
16. Moore and his going to his home town of Flint, the discussions with Lila and others about the war? The group of young recruits, their all having relatives in Iraq, the comment about the poorer classes going to war and being killed for the sake of the middle classes? His going to Washington, interviewing the people from Congress about the possibility of their children enlisting? Lila, the story of her son, his going, the reading out of his letters from Iraq, the anti-Bush tone? The phone call about his death? The television? Lila, the father, the rest of the family? Lila and her job, the discussion about the social and economic situations in Flint, those going to the war? Her going to Washington, trying to get to the White House, the repairs and blockages around the White House for security in 2002 and 2003?
17. Bush saying that he was a war president, his history – the election of 2004 and this film as a piece of propaganda against Bush? The information given, opening up of avenues for investigation, for assessment of the history of the US 2000-2004?
