A response to some of the criticisms of “Phoenix-Pen reviews Fahrenheit9/11”

DarkSorceress wrote: “I watched Fahrenheit, and I must say that I thoroughly enjoyed it”. While I’m glad to find someone who did not hate the film, anyone who could leave it having “enjoyed” it would seem to prove that Moore is just as populist and boo-yay as any of his opponents.Mbwun made (in my humble opinion) some very good points-yes; there was manipulation in the first half, though I would still suggest that the second was worse. And yes, die hard Bush-ites will not be converted, but perhaps a few who were on the fence will change their minds, and even more likely, those who are kind-of democrat will actually get off their arses and vote. It may be more useful as a motivational tool than in actually garnering “new” votes. Mbwum’s argument that “Moore didn't always seem to know what his argument was” is unjustified. Moore accused the regime of not doing enough in that they ignored warnings from the CIA and let the Bin Ladens leave America. He is not contradicting himself by then criticizing the patriot act. The regime did not do enough, and then instead of simply dealing swiftly with the aftermath they started eroding civil liberties: an unnecessary response, and as Moore rightly points out, the wrong one. They would have been better off moving more swiftly against Osama bin Laden and Afghanistan.CommandoCody then suggested that Moore would collude with “those who would see America burn”. In fact, I thought Moore was comparatively patriotic-he made no criticism of the war in Afghanistan, except that perhaps the USA was too slow to take this action. Yet people in the international community have felt that even that war was premature . . .

I had e-mailed CommandoCody, thanking him for the review and the links. He wrote back rather nicely, apologizing for venting his anger at Moore on me (don’t worry, I hadn’t taken it too personally!) and saying “Also, being that you are an English person and I am an American, I should hope that Moore’s conduct while in your country does not reflect too badly on us on the other side of the pond. We’re not the monsters Moore claims us tobe.” I certainly don’t think of Americans as monsters!                                                                                                                                                    

I have checked out the sites he recommended. Dave Kopel makes some interesting points, and seems to substantiate them pretty well. Yes, it would seem Moore was even more manipulative than I thought, and yes perhaps there are “deceits” in Fahrenheit9/11. I would not hesitate to recommend this site to anyone interested in getting the other side of the story BUT be aware that the Kopel is a staunch Republican, that some of the accusations he levels at Moore are just as flimsy and possibly a product of misquotation or misinterpretation as much as anything that Moore has used. I can’t unreservedly recommend the site: if it were made into a film, my suspicion is that there wouldn’t be much to choose between it and Fahrenheit9/11 in terms of accuracy and fairness. But then, neither Moore nor Kopel seem to have that as their first concern.                                  

This leads nicely onto point 4.

fugiguru pointed out the need to do my own research. She also liked the fact that the film created debate, while criticizing Moore’s manipulations. I would tend to agree with her review-I wrote the initial essay only seven hours after seeing the film, it was truly a “gut reaction” and my dislike of Moore’s techniques is increasing the more I consider them. fugiguruvoiced the belief that I am coming to, namely that neither side is going to tell us the unembellished truth, and the best we can do is to hear both sides out, double check all statistics and try and make up our own mind. Oh, and we probably shouldn’t get too attached to any position: we’re likely to have to change it!!!                                                                            fantur-mandosrightly pointed out that even if you dislike Moore’s approach you need to listen to his opinions: whatever your opinions it is hypocritical and simply silly not to listen to other people.

So how to conclude . . . the original review was a gut reaction, were I writing it now I would be more critical. Moore is probably as populist and propagandist as Bush. Both sides are busy producing polemics rather than reasoned appraisals, so we have to listen to both sides, double check the statistics and make up our own mind. So what do I think now? The Bush regime is not exactly great, there is probably a great deal of corruption, but Moore is nearly as bad.