F9/11: The Temperature at Which Fox News Fumes

I first saw Fahrenheit 9/11 in the theater. Many of my young, liberal compatriots and I needed this movie to assuage our rage at this dull president who definitely did not have a reputation for progressive ideas. I already despised Bush for his thoughts on pro-choice rights, fondness for Creationism and religion in general, lack of concern for gay rights, his attacks on stem cell research, and general butchering of the English language. Fahrenheit 9/11 speaks to the choir. Much like Religulous, it picks an easy target, caters to a built in audience, and then rips away with the satirical remarks. Which I like. Though I do enjoy Maher more than Moore. The first ten minutes showcases many confused looks on Bush’s face and recaps how he robbed Al Gore. Which, he did. Jeb was indeed governor and the great state of Florida (my home state) had the ugliest voting mishaps.


I don’t think that the film had a good deal of political influence. It maybe stirred up conspiracy theory buffs a little more. Bush still got another four years. It did, however, have a social impact. It is the highest grossing documentary ever. Seriously, ever. It grossed over $222 million. I think Moore’s brand of sensationalism and showmanship appeal to the left due to our lack of Rush Limbaughs and Ann Coulters. It also got a depressed left fired up again. I never had any productive conversations about the film. I had just started at the University of South Florida and was involved with the few liberal groups we had on campus. My mom thinks Moore is Satan. The Young Republicans table handed out fliers also claiming Moore was Satan. My friends and I continued to think Bush was a dolt. The film did not have the political influence to cause frenzy or fervor (like a propaganda film often does) but it did make people on both sides of the line angry. I’m surprised Bill O’ Reilly didn’t have an aneurysm. People love to talk about what makes them angry. Michael Moore has made four of the ten highest grossing documentaries ever (Capitalism: A Love Story, Bowling for Columbine, Sicko, and Fahrenheit 9/11). He definitely gets people talking about issues they otherwise may not and that always has an impact.


I love Christopher Hitchens but he is off base when he compares Moore’s film standards to Riefenstahl’s. He didn’t whip any kind of nationalist fervor even if he spurred some to create those obnoxious 9/11 truth groups. The film is definitely not propaganda. Aufderhide even defends more against critics’ claim of the film being propaganda by stating “Moore is not a minion of the powerful as propagandists are.” (20) He has no authority over the citizenry and has no political power to gain. Aufderhide does not classify the film as an advocacy film either because Fahrenheit 9/11 mobilize people for a action on a specific cause or issue (78). It is biased though. He has a montage of the Bushes fraternizing with Saudi elites set what I believe is REM. Later, he splices together contradictory news clips where some encourage citizens to fly and buy things while others talk of the heightened security and to avoid flying. Moore’s movie can even be seen as counterpropaganda because propaganda enforces the rules of society (Aufderhide, 77) rather than challenging them. It’s at least fun and makes me laugh. Oh, and you get to see Ashcroft sing. Really?


For more mixed feelings:
Doublethink
Filthy Critic
Proper Propaganda