Movie seeks a role in shaping politics
______________________________
UP FRONT | `FAHRENHEIT 9/11'
BY RENE RODRIGUEZ
The Miami Herald
rrodriguez@herald.com
Posted on Wed, Jun. 23, 2004
Can a mere movie really have a noticeable impact on a presidential election?
Michael Moore thinks so. For two months, the Oscar-winning director of Bowling for Columbine has been on a nonstop media blitz to promote his latest documentary, Fahrenheit 9/11, which opens in New York today and in the rest of the country on Friday.
An unapologetically slanted -- and often hilarious -- critique of the George W. Bush administration, Fahrenheit 9/11 argues that Bush stole the 2000 election from Al Gore, bungled the government's response to Sept. 11, then manipulated the country into supporting an unjustifiable invasion of Iraq.
To support his arguments, Moore uses footage rarely glimpsed on CNN, including the presidential limo being pelted by eggs during the inaugural parade and U.S. soldiers in Iraq admitting they have no clue why they're there.
As usual for Moore, Fahrenheit 9/11 will be scrutinized by critics for the way Moore sometimes plays with the facts to support his stance.
INFLUENCING EVENTS
But long after the controversy dies down, Fahrenheit 9/11 will be remembered as a rare mainstream American documentary specifically designed to influence ongoing political events, instead of looking back on them through the prism of hindsight.
Speaking by telephone from his apartment in Manhattan, Moore initially downplays the suggestion that the singular purpose of Fahrenheit 9/11 is to unseat Bush.
''Who wants to go see a movie that just shows how bad Bush is?'' he said. ``That would either be ostracizing or preaching to the choir.
'If it were just about the politics, I'd be on the campaign trail right now. But I'm a filmmaker, so first and foremost, I want people to leave the theater feeling like they got their nine bucks' worth.''
Eventually, though, Moore acknowledges that, party lines aside, he hopes to reach one particular segment of the audience: the unmotivated voter.
''Fifty percent of this country doesn't vote,'' Moore said, ``and the majority of those are the poor, working class, African Americans, young people, single moms -- the people who are most affected by the decisions in Washington, D.C. They are filled with such a sense of despair and cynicism, they just don't participate.
``If they were to awaken and show up at the polls, you would see that the country is not as evenly divided as the media tells us it is. I hope this film makes a small contribution to getting people out of the house and participating in their democracy.''
The $6 million production, financed by Miramax Films, is being jointly released on 868 screens -- the widest release ever for a documentary -- by Lions Gate Films and IFC Films. The two distributors stepped in after the Walt Disney Co., which owns Miramax, blocked the release.
That decision was widely publicized days before Fahrenheit 9/11 premiered at the Cannes Film Festival in May, where it became the first documentary in nearly 50 years to win the prestigious Palme d'Or. Tuesday, Moore unsuccessfully appealed the R rating given to the film by the Motion Picture Association of America's ratings board. And Ray Bradbury, author of the classic Fahrenheit 451, publicly demanded Moore change his title.
Fahrenheit 9/11 is also coming out at a time when documentaries are enjoying surprising mainstream acceptance, due to the success of Capturing the Friedmans, Super Size Me and Moore's own Bowling for Columbine, which grossed a record $21.6 million in 2003.
''Political controversy does not help the opening of most films,'' says Paul Dergarabedian, president of Exhibitor Relations Co., a box-office tracking firm. ``But with Fahrenheit 9/11, you have a film that is purely a product of its time, and in an election year, could become very popular. You've got a situation like we had with The Passion of the Christ. We know it's going to be big; we just don't know how big.''
But can ticket sales translate into votes? Ronald Brownstein, a political columnist for The Los Angeles Times and author of The Power and the Glitter: The Hollywood-Washington Connection, says that in a typical election year, Moore wouldn't be much of a factor.
''As a propagandist, Moore is more of a mobilizer than a persuader,'' Brownstein said. ``He has made himself into such an ideological figure, he has a self-selected audience. So the ability of his movie to affect a race is going to be pretty limited.''
But with polls placing the presidential race at a dead heat, Brownstein thinks Moore could play a role after all.
''If the election stays as close as it is, then everything matters,'' Brownstein said. ``If you look at who is undecided in this election, they tend to be less attuned to politics and the conventional news sources. By being covered on E! and Entertainment Tonight, Michael Moore is going to reach people who are not watching ads from Bush and Kerry on CNN.''
ANTI-MOORE FORCES
This concern has mobilized the anti-Moore forces, which are legion. Minnesota filmmaker Mike Wilson is finishing his own documentary, Michael Moore Hates America, hoping to rush it into theaters this fall. Due in bookstores Tuesday is Michael Moore is a Big Fat Stupid White Man, written by David T. Hardy and Jason Clarke.
And the conservative group moveamericaforward.org is petitioning theater chains not to book Fahrenheit 9/11. According to a posting on its website: ``We have a right to tell movie theaters we object to their promoting a movie that is nothing more than a political campaign commercial which should be shown at the Democratic National Convention or as an al Qaeda training video before it's shown at our local cinema.''
Fahrenheit 9/11's pre-release uproar is strikingly similar to the one that surrounded The Passion of the Christ, another film that offered a personal take on hot-button material. ''All this controversy reaffirms something that people don't really want to talk about when they talk about most aspects of our culture, especially movies,'' said Henry A. Giroux, global TV network chair in communications at McMaster University in Canada and author of Breaking in to the Movies: Film and the Culture of Politics. ``There is this pre-supposition that films are simply entertainment. But they're not all about just entertainment.
''What Moore recognizes is that his films are a form of public pedagogy,'' Giroux said. ``It's trying to say something about the world and make an intervention into public life. The political climate has become so poisonous around the question of dissent, it is now the antithesis of patriotism. There's a knee-jerk response to any cultural text that is even remotely critical of authority. But this is what artists should do. This film's real radical potential is not whether or not it gets Bush reelected, but whether it can open up a space for real debate and dialogue.''
That is the effect Moore hopes Fahrenheit 9/11 will have.
''My films are a work of journalism, but they're the journalism of the op-ed page,'' Moore said. ``My job is not to present all the sides. My job is to present my side. I may not be correct on my opinion. I think I am, because it's my opinion. But I may not be. That's why I say let's have the debate.''
miami.com |
