And a minute or two of black screen in the movie tell you all you need to know about it. I'll get back to that.
Before I review the movie let me make three things clear. First, Michael Moore has a right to make this movie and to profit from it. I'm a free market capitalist and a first amendment fan and I say he's entitled to submit his movie to market forces and be seen. Second, I would say Moore is a skilled propagandist. He even makes a point or two worth considering. But they are lost in the orgy of Bush bashing and anti-war exploitation of widows and amputees. Third, I would say that as Moore as the right to put the movie out, the rest of us have a responsibility to review it and to revile it for what it is: vile anti-American propaganda.
I knew that if I was going to comment on the movie, and how could I not as a conservative blogger, I needed to actually see the whole movie. So I reluctantly went to my local metroplex and, with teeth gritted, coughed up the $7.50 to see it. Let me just say it took enormous willpower not to walk out in the first 10 minutes or heckle the screen throughout. But I made it. As painful as it was I suffered through the whole movie. Here's my review:
Unfortunately, the movie is effective as propaganda. It drives hard at it's theme (Bush is bad) with a relentless unflattering portrayal of George W. Bush. Also of everyone in the administration: Dick Cheney, Condoleeza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell, John Ashcroft, and Paul Wolfowitz. All get hammered with unflattering portayals. All driven by a running narrative by Moore telling his simple story that goes something like this:
George Bush is a bad man from a bad family including Pappa Bush. They are all corrupted by oil money. They are owned by Saudi Arabia, who owns a large portion of America, and are their puppets. First, the Bush's (George, Jeb, etc.) disenfranchised all of the blacks in America and stole the 2000 election by stealing Florida and then having Pappa Bush's friends on the Supreme Court seal the deal. Then the set their eyes on looting the country through big oil. The Bush's are surrounded by corrupt people who are also owned by big oil (Haliburtion, Harken, Arbusto Drilling) and by big defense (The Carlyle Group). Bush's corrupt minions (Cheney, Powell, Rice, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz) were all asleep at the switch for 9/11 because they were plotting a takeover of Iraq for it's oil and for revenge from the Gulf War. After 9/11 all the evil minions realized that their friends (Osama bin Laden, the Taliban, Saudi Arabia) were guilty, so they decided to attack poor innocent Sadaam Hussein as a coverup. (See the video of the smiling dancing Sadaam. Hey, he's not too bad!). They had to attack Afghanistan first, but only as a ruse. And they did all of this so that they could build a pipeline through Afghanistan and make billions of dollars with all of their corrupt oil buddies.
And oh, by the way, Al Gore and all of the Democrats are guilty too because they didn't stop it.
And oh, by the way, all of the media is guilty too because they reported favorably on the war. And Fox News Network is especially evil because they apparently conspired with the evil Bush's by calling Florida for Bush on election night. (Disregard the fact that they were right).
And oh, by the way, all of our troops are bloodthirsty killers who play rock and roll in their tanks as they blow up only innocent Iraqis in a country that "never killed a single American".
And oh, by the way, Michael Moore really does love America and our troops.
Can I gag now? I certainly did while I was watching the movie.
Moore is a master of weaving falsehoods, quick edits, unflattering pictures, and interviews with only those that support his views. He mixes, out-of-context quotes, outlandish speculation, and unfounded accusations in a building pace to walk you to a conclusion: George W. Bush and his people are the biggest evil on the planet.
It would take pages to do a complete critical analysis of the movie, and those can be found from more talented writers than me. Let me just take a few shots:
Mockery: Moore has a field day making fun of Bush for taking a "vacation" in Texas in August 20001. He states, not implies, that Bush was loafing and "should've shown up for work" right before the terrorist attacks. Never mind that presidents before him routinely get out of Washington in August because the Congress is not in session and there's no legislative work to do. Never mind that president's are rarely ever truly on vacation - with satellite phones and secret service and National Security staff meeting with them every day.
Conspiracy Theory: Moore makes a lot out of a blacked out name on Bush's released medical records from his Texas National Guard days. The released record includes a page relating to two airmen failing their medical exams: Bush and a Mr. Bath. Moore makes a lot out of the blacked out name of Mr. Bath and weaves an elaborate conspiracy involving the Saudis and oil money. A more reasonable explanation to anyone who has ever served in the military is that the Privacy Act applies and Bush cannot release the record of Mr. Bath. That' why it's blacked out. But that's too simple and doesn't fit the need of a propagandist.
Falsehoods: An early example comes in the opening montage about Bush stealing the 2000 election. Moore pans a newspaper headline "Gore wins in statewide recount", followed by a video clip of a Gore partisan saying the same thing. Wow! Really! Gore won? The trick here is the phrase "statewide recount". True, 3 independent news sources obtained the ballots after the election and finished the "recount". They did conclude that Gore won a statewided recount. The problem is that it is irrelevant. Gore's official challenge to the election was not statewide. Gore only challenged 4 cherry-picked heavily Democratic counties. The independent news agencies concluded that Bush won the election when recounting just those 4 counties. So, under Gore's chosen contest - Bush won and the election stands. Moore left out those inconvenient facts because they do not fit with his propaganda.
Outrageous claims: Moore repeats the canard that Bush's allies purged the voter rolls in Florida of "people not likely to vote for him. You know, you can usually tell them by the color of their skin". That's a vicious and racist allegation. The rolls were purged of felons ineligible to vote. And they were purged by county officials, most of whom in Florida are Democrats.
Interviews: Moore interviews several people, all of them from the same viewpoint. Only two congressmen, McDermott and Conyers, who are among the most liberal partisans in Congress. He inteviews a 9-11 widow mad at Bush. She has a right to her anger, but do you suppose there are widows who support Bush? Of course there are. Not in Moore's film however. Moore exploits the grief of a mother who lost a son in Iraq who's mad at Bush. Do you think there are parents of soldiers who support the war? Not in Moore's film. He interviews wounded soldiers mad at Bush. Again, they are entitled to their anger but I imagine that there are wounded soldiers who are proud of what they accomplished in Iraq. Not in Moore's film. Most eggregiously, he films Iraqi people shouting their hatred of Bush. Are there Iraqis who are grateful that we liberated their country? Of course there are. Not in Moore's film.
I could go on and on. But the black screen is the most telling. So let's go back to it.
Since the film is nominally about 9-11 Moore has to cover it and he does. For a few moments the screen goes black. We hear the sounds of the planes slamming into the buildings. We hear screams and moans and chaos. All of the sounds we are familiar with from that day. But no pictures. Eventually the picture comes back and we see people standing confused in the street. Crying. Ashes falling. Some brief comment by Moore and then he moves on.
Why the black screen? Why no video of the planes slamming into the buildings? Why no video of the bodies jumping out of the buildings? Why no video of the buildings collapsing with mass murder as the consequence? Why none of that most compelling video. This is afer all a movie, not an audio, and this is after all the pivotal moment of 9/11. Is it because there's no video of those events? No - there is plenty of video available. We've all seen them. Is it because it's too gruesome? No - Moore has no problem showing gruesome footage when it makes America look bad.
Ah, that's it. It's because propaganda is most effective when appealing to emotions. And the emotions you feel when you watch the planes hitting the towers, and the bodies jumping out, and the buildings falling are not the emotions that the master propagandist Moore wants you to experience. Those emotions helped us bond with George W. Bush. They do not fit the 'Bush is Bad' conclusion that Moore is driving at. That's why the screen is black during the most pivotal moment of 9/11. And that black screen is Michael Moore's shame.
Those few of you that clapped when the lights came up - I'm worried about you. I know that there is no talking to the grown up Bush-haters in the crowd who saw their own blind partisan hatred of Bush echoed back in this film. But I am worried about the twentysomethings who did not grow up in an era of real propaganda and are unprepared to critically analyze it. But then again, most of those clapping did not look to me like people likely to be registered voters, so I'll relax.
