Fahrenheit 9/11

Michael Moore's epic is the most controversial, and among the most important, films produced in a generation (or longer). The scathing attack on the latest Bush regime (and, indeed, the entire Bush family), which focuses on the Iraq war and the "war on terror" subsequent to the September 11 attacks, is a brilliant piece of cinematography and is setting records at the box office. Moore has an agenda, but everybody in the theatre knows this. Moore's brilliance is the way that he consistently uses George W. Bush and company's own words to demonstrate how this administration is manipulating and using the American public. Example: in the summer of 2001, many key figures in the Bush administration stated that there was no threat to the US from Iraq. Switch to Winter 2002/Spring 2003, and suddenly we "know" that Saddam has weapons of mass destruction and ties to Al Quaeda.

I'm not going to write review of this movie - there are plenty of people out there doing that (see Mary Meltz in the Portland Press Herald, for one). I am sure that the reaction to the film will fall in line with one's political leanings. However, I will comment that there are a lot of important issues addressed in the film, not all the sole province of the war on Iraq or the war on terror.

The most important issue, in my opinion, is the role of money in the war and in our society. The Bush family is shown with extensive ties to Saudi Arabia and the Bin Laden family. The Saudis have an extensive investment in the United States economy. The Bush family has made multiple millions of dollars through its ties with the Saudis. Moore suggests that these ties led GW to turn his head on the Saudi involvement in the 9/11 attacks, along with the ongoing blind eye toward Saudi human rights violations.

As disturbing as this message is, I was most digusted with a gathering of the giants from the defense, engineering and oil companies (headlined by Halliburton), where the message was that "there is a lot of oil in Iraq. As soon as reconstruction begins and the oil begins to flow, there are huge profits to be made." It's a sick, cynical message as American and other coalition soldiers are killed or maimed, not to mention the thousands of Iraqi soldiers and citizens. Representatives of the American companies who stand to profit most were practically licking their chops at the "opportunities" that awaited them.

Moore's images also drive home the human impact of this war. American TV hasn't shown the pictures of dead American soldiers, much less the many thousands more wounded. American TV certainly hasn't shown the images of the dead Iraqis, or of their grieving families. Fahrenheit 9/11 shows these pictures, however, and they are heartbreaking. Real people are fighting this war, and real families on both sides of the planet are affected by the violence.

The juxtaposition is disturbing but the message is clear - somebody (maybe you or a friend or family member) has died for the sole purpose of making somebody else (most likely not you or anybody you know) very wealthy. Check that - "even more wealthy". Moore illustrates how our "vouluntary" armed services are largely staffed by the very poorest Americans. These people sign up to protect a promise of prosperity that very few of them will ever taste. Meanwhile, the rich kids stay safe at home. In a vintage sequence, Moore stands in front of the Capital, imploring members of Congress to sign up their sons to help preserve "freedom" in Iraq. The reactions are priceless.

OK, this has kind of turned into a review of the movie. I could go on, but instead I recommend that you, the reader, find a way to see this movie. Unfortunately, it is in limited release in the US - only 800 or so screens. Yet these screens are selling out, making F9/11 the highest-grossing movie of the weekend, and the highest-grossing documentary of all time, eclipsing Moore's Bowling for Columbine in just three days of release!

And this is really the (original) point of my post - Fahrenheit 9/11 is already a cultural phenomenon. Only three theatres are showing it in Maine - The Movies in Portland, the Railroad Square Cinema in Waterville, and the Eveningstar Cinema here in Brunswick. I've attended many films at the Eveningstar over the last three years, but have seen nothing like this. We were turned away from a sold out show on Saturday (all shows sold out), but were able to buy tickets for Sunday. By the time we arrived at the theatre, the line was out of the building, and three of the five daily shows were already sold out for the day. By the time our show was let out, the 5:00 show (which was not sold out when we entered the theatre) had a line out the door. People are tired of the direction that the current regime is taking this country, tired of the lies, and tired of the transparent motivations of Bush and Company. People are demanding to see this film, despite the best efforts of Disney , (whose Miramax subsidiary dropped the film), the major movie theatre chains ("not enough people want to see documentaries"), US film distributors, and lots of right-wing blowhards who would make it seem "unAmerican" and "unpatriotic" to see this film.

Attending this film is not "unpatriotic". The expression of free speech is a cornerstone of a democratic society. I won't say that it is your civic duty to see the movie, because that's no better than trying to suppress the message. Lots of patriotic Americans are lining up for F 9/11. The crowds at the Eveningstar range from college age kids to people well into their retirement years, and everything in between. There is no better way to get people to see or read something than to try to censor it from them - our natural curiosity leads us to find out what they don't want us to know. The Bush administration has a lot to hide from America, but they don't do a very good job hiding it. Michael Moore found out, and I suggest you do, too.

Comments

I'm not sure why you can't comment. My settings indicate that anybody can leave a comment. But feel free to register or whatever you have to do to leave a comment. I won't sell any of your personal information unless I get a really good price for it!

Squirrel ups the Ante

The squirrel that I have been doing battle with over the last couple of months has upped the ante.

Like most people who have bird feeders, mine has become a squirrel feeder. Squirrels are cute, but they aren't birds, and their use of the feeder is unauthorized. I want to feed the chickadees and gold finches. I tell the squirrels this, yell, chase them away, shake my fist like an old geezer (I have a lot of time on my hands right now). Nothing works.

Until recently, there was apparently only one squirrel feeding from my feeder, but yesterday the unexpected happened. When I opened the front door to chase him (or her) off, two squirrels jumped down. Worse yet, squirrel #2 was obviously a juvenile.

This is a cunning ploy by the squirrel. As much as I realize that the baby squirrel will grow up to be a full-grown nuisance, I still feel guilty in depriving a baby squirrel of its food. Imagine, a squirrel playing head games with me.

That worked for about a day. Today I yelled at the baby (who is already feeding there on his own), chased him, and shook my fist. When I looked a moment ago, he was back . . .

Supersize Me

Supersize Me, a film by Morgan Spurlock, is an entertaining romp through the Fast Food World that we live in. In the film, Spurlock makes himself into a guinea pig, testing the effect of eating nothing but McDonald's meals over the course of 30 days, with the caveat that he Supersizes the meal if asked by the person taking his order. He has a complete physical evaluation before the experiment and follow-up exams every week. Predictably, his physical condition takes a turn for worse as the month wears on.

Aside from experiment, around which the film flows, Spurlock talks to many parties related to the issue of obesity and McDonalds' (and the fast-food industry in general) role in the problem in this country. Interspersed throughout are interviews with dieticians and doctors, lawyers, the former surgeon general, a food industry lobbyist, school nutritionists, physical education teachers, and others. Notably absent is an interview with a representative of McDonalds, though this is no oversight of the filmmaker. In the process, Spurlock addresses many issues that confront us in the United States.

First and foremost, of course, is obesity. 37% of the children and adolescents in the United States carry too much fat, according to the film's web site, while two-thirds of American adults are overweight or obese. Spurlock shows us how the problem has grown and spread throughout the United States in the last 30 years. At the same time, many physical problems have become more predominant, including cardiovascular disease and adult-onset diabetes. We are told that obesity is now second behind only smoking in the number of preventable deaths it causes in the United States.

Lawyers, noting the correlation between increased obesity and the proliferation of fast food restaurants in this country, have sued McDonalds for the poor health of two overweight teenage girls. One lawyer, when asked pointedly why he was pursuing the litigation, was unable to come up with a ready answer outside of "monetary compensation". Though not one of the primary themes of the film, the quickness with which Americans resort to "Suing the Bastards" is another disturbing truth that is explored.

In traveling the country, Spurlock introduces us to physical education instructors who lament the lack of physical education available to students. While people should ideally get 30 minutes of exercise daily, some children get only 45 minutes per week, while other schools neither require nor offer phys ed classes. One offshoot of George W. Bush's "no child left behind" program is that fewer resources are available for physical education in schools, resulting in some schools relying on private funding of gym classes while others cancel classes altogether. Meanwhile, private food providers "support" education via school lunch programs, but the result is a lot of soda and chips in school and not a lot of balance in the meals. By offering these lunches, schools support the private vendors, however the "support" received from the food industry does not come in the form of the financing of health-education classes that might allow the children to make informed choices in their food purchases. Meanwhile, a school for "problem" adolescents in Wisconsin offers balanced, healthy meals featuring whole grains and seasonal produce for approximately the same cost as they would pay the food factories, and discovered fewer behavioral problems and more attentive students as a result.

Greed is another undercurrent in the film. The private vendors of certain school lunch programs are involved because it benefits the bottom line, not because they have any interest in supporting education. Until very recently, McDonalds has shown little inclination to provide healthier alternatives because they are making billions of dollars doing business as usual. One could cynically conclude that the recent introduction of salads (which are shown to also be high sugar/high-calorie in the film) has everything to do with maintaining market share and nothing to do with an interest in public health. That's because McDonalds' management does not answer to the public, it answers to the shareholder, and the shareholder is interested primarily in the bottom line.

We are also left with questions about personal accountability. Where is the line drawn between where McDonalds assumes responsibility for not providing healthy meals and where we as individuals assume responsibility for our own choices? One teenage girl, after meeting Jared from Subway, laments that she can't afford to buy two sandwiches a day from that particular chain. She obviously has not been taught the basics of healthy nutrition. The role of lobbyists and advertising in painting our perceptions is addressed, as well as the lack of oversight that the government demonstrates over student nutrition. We even see the impact of the "Wal-Martization" of the USA.

This is an entertaining film, but it is quite disturbing. It really shows the unsavory underbelly of life in America, though certainly not with the "in your face" style of, say, Michael Moore. I do find it lacking in that there is no clear segment about the basics of healthy eating, where a few minutes spent here might have been helpful. Also, no reference is made in the film to the book Fast Food Nation by Eric Schlosser, which also addressed the McDonalds problem back in 2001. I have not read Fast Food Nation, so I'm not really sure if this is an oversight, but it seems a notable omission in my opinion. Otherwise, very well done!