Review of Fahrenheit 9/11 (2004) by Paul Z — 22 Jun 2010

Fahrenheit 9/11 opens not unlike Moore's earlier films, but deals with something much more macrocosmic in nature. Moore, as narrator, offers banter and irony, and periodically emerges on screen as a purposeful irritant, such as when he brings along a Marine who declined to rotate again to Iraq and together, they call the bluffs of congressmen, advising them to have their children enlist. And he makes effective use of frank clips like Bush rehearsing looks on his face before going live with his broadcast to the nation about 9/11. Why in a time when we have a level-headed president with essentially logical reasons for expanding government power do his vehement opponents forget the PATRIOT Act they supported? Moore discovers that members of Congress don't read most bills they vote on, including said bill which among other things involved government infiltration of pacifist groups. And so---possibly my favorite moment---Moore drives through Washington in an ice cream truck using the speaker to read the bill to them.

Fahrenheit 9/11 is less a revelation about Bush than a melodrama of his futile, alarming presidency. Its indictments shouldn't be news to anyone, but either way Moore delineates them with striking footage and an unremitting voice-over narration that basically reasons that Bush is (thankfully was) inept, lying, fraudulent, failing in the war on terrorism, has poor preference of friends. While Moore's voice-over modulates from indignation to cynicism, some incisive visual sections speak for themselves. Moore serves a new jolt with well-acquainted information. It's how he organizes his imagery. We're all acquainted with the 2000 election dispute, which was "resolved" by the Supreme Court. What I hadn't seen before was footage of Bush's election confirmation by Congress. 10 representatives stand to object to it; not one senator. As we watch the dissenters, we can't help observing that they're nine black people, one Asian woman. They're all gaveled into silence by the chairman, Vice President Al Gore. The scene's desperation and hopelessness reignites old agitations for those who know Bush was counterfeit.

He is depicted as much indebted to friends who've bailed him out of business risks. Moore chronicles a longstanding affiliation between the Bush family and important Saudi Arabians. A billion-plus in Saudi money has passed into the treasure chests of Bush family endeavors. After 9/11 the White House hand-walked flights out of the country transporting bin Laden family members (which disavow its most widely known member). Moore looks at military records released by Bush to elucidate his desertion of the Texas Air National Guard, and discovers that the name of another pilot's been censored. This pilot, we find, was Bush's friend who became Texas money manager for the billionaire bin Ladens. Another clue to the bond between the Bushes and the Saudis: The law firm of Bush 41's Secretary of State was enlisted by the Saudis to defend a suit by a group of 9/11 survivors, who charged that the Saudis had bankrolled al-Qaeda.

To Moore, this is more proof of Bush's demoralizing alliance with the Saudis, that it may've affected his choice to go to war against Iraq to some degree on their account. Moore finds the war groundless. No WMDs, no Hussein-bin Laden connection. He speaks with American soldiers, including amputees, who grieve indignantly about Bush's proposed military cuts simultaneously as he was sending them into a groundless war. Moore also interviews American troops who are evidently relishing the war. He has footage of soldiers who hood an Iraqi prisoner, call him "Ali Baba" and touch his penis.

The Bush administration didn't seem to know what every newscaster knows, that a satellite image can be live before they get the cue to speak. That clarifies the disgusting footage of Wolfowitz wetting his comb in his mouth before slicking back his hair. Comb doesn't do the trick, so he spits in his hand, wipes it down. And naturally the immortal "fool me twice" clip. Such scenes catch our targets unawares, which is classic Moore. However his film gets gradually bleaker. He predominantly vanishes, concentrating on people such as an enormously patriotic wife/mother from his hometown of Flint. She reads a letter from her son, written days before he was killed in Iraq, begging his family to strive for Bush's impeachment.

This, the highest-grossing documentary of all time, is indeed an imperative, effective film, defiant of the White House aim, which was to exhibit Bush as a determined commander. He's exposed as a superficial, incoherent man, childish in speech, phony in demeanor. Not quite as broad-scale as Bowling for Columbine, Moore moderates his typical profusion. Tackling bigger risks, he's more gingerly here. We get an editorial, not a shtick. The anger and bewilderment in his film are a breathtaking reply to Bush's uninflected reverberation of the same intractable soundbites. Which one's lost more ground over time, and which one's gained more? Also, which made sense at the time?