Cultural excitement, part 2
It's getting late. I'll keep this brief. I want to sleep. But probably won't. Nonetheless...
So, I was out tonight (strictly speaking last night, see below, etc, etc...) watching Farenheit 9/11. I read a lot of mixed reviews of this - the usual right-wing mendicants slating it (as an aside, I was impressed by the sheer hypocrisy garnered by Christopher Hitchens. A man who, in his (very impressive, entertaining and worthwhile) documentary on Mother Theresa managed to attack her for dressing in shabby clothes. So if she'd have worn a Versace dress, you'd have been happier, eh, Hitch? Nonetheless, this man attacks Michael Moore for making a polemic and somewhat one-sided film? What? Good enough for you, but not anyone else, eh? And then attacks Moore for trying to make Bush look stupid? I don't think he was really trying - true, it got cheap laughs, but it was surely a more honest representation of the man than if he'd been presented as intelligent? Hmmm, anyway, back to the issue...) and a suprising number of people who might have been thought to support it also lining up to have a go. Possibly Moore's a little too brash, too loud, too American. Almost certainly too self-congratulatory (although that came across in the film far less than I was expecting). What can't be denied is that it is a very powerful piece of film-making. And whilst it has its flaws (the section showing how the poor are those who sign up for the military is hardly suprising, whilst accosting senators on the street trying to get them to sign their children up for the army was never going to be more than a gimmick, and did little to reinforce the point that only one of the 500-odd men and women who sent troops into Iraq have serving children) the opening section contains criticisms of Bush that Moore's detractors ignore. That he stole the election - not really deniable. That he did business with the Bin Laden family - a matter of public record. That his close relationship with the Saudi royal family helps to keep tales of Saudi atrocities out of the press, and allows attention to be redirected to other countries - obvious, really. That he's a liar, an idiot and not fit to run a parish-fair cake stall, never mind the sole remaining super-power? Well, that has to be derived, but it isn't difficult.
Go see this film. And hopefully it'll help see Dubya out of office.
So, I was out tonight (strictly speaking last night, see below, etc, etc...) watching Farenheit 9/11. I read a lot of mixed reviews of this - the usual right-wing mendicants slating it (as an aside, I was impressed by the sheer hypocrisy garnered by Christopher Hitchens. A man who, in his (very impressive, entertaining and worthwhile) documentary on Mother Theresa managed to attack her for dressing in shabby clothes. So if she'd have worn a Versace dress, you'd have been happier, eh, Hitch? Nonetheless, this man attacks Michael Moore for making a polemic and somewhat one-sided film? What? Good enough for you, but not anyone else, eh? And then attacks Moore for trying to make Bush look stupid? I don't think he was really trying - true, it got cheap laughs, but it was surely a more honest representation of the man than if he'd been presented as intelligent? Hmmm, anyway, back to the issue...) and a suprising number of people who might have been thought to support it also lining up to have a go. Possibly Moore's a little too brash, too loud, too American. Almost certainly too self-congratulatory (although that came across in the film far less than I was expecting). What can't be denied is that it is a very powerful piece of film-making. And whilst it has its flaws (the section showing how the poor are those who sign up for the military is hardly suprising, whilst accosting senators on the street trying to get them to sign their children up for the army was never going to be more than a gimmick, and did little to reinforce the point that only one of the 500-odd men and women who sent troops into Iraq have serving children) the opening section contains criticisms of Bush that Moore's detractors ignore. That he stole the election - not really deniable. That he did business with the Bin Laden family - a matter of public record. That his close relationship with the Saudi royal family helps to keep tales of Saudi atrocities out of the press, and allows attention to be redirected to other countries - obvious, really. That he's a liar, an idiot and not fit to run a parish-fair cake stall, never mind the sole remaining super-power? Well, that has to be derived, but it isn't difficult.
Go see this film. And hopefully it'll help see Dubya out of office.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home