1115.org

Bill O’Reilly compared him to Nazi propagandist Josef Goebbles. Ann Coulter said he was a traitor. Joe Scarborough even called him a Canadian. Yet after the debut of his new film Fahrenheit 9/11, Michael Moore seems to be having the last laugh. Initial reports indicate that the movie’s weekend take was a staggering $21.8 million, which already beats out Moore’s Bowling For Columbine as the most successful (non-IMAX) documentary of all time. Even more impressively, this was accomplished on only 868 screens, a miniscule amount compared to the the 2,700+ screens that the second place film, White Chicks, was being shown on. Moore has a lot to be proud of: it’s isn’t every day that a fat middle-aged guy is more popular than a couple of white chicks…at least when said chicks are being played by the Wayans brothers.

(You can bet that Disney shareholders will be asking Michael Eisner a few questions after this. Possibly after sticking slivers of bamboo under his fingernails.)

As we have mentioned previously, neither of us at 1115.org are unabashed Michael Moore fans. While we have enjoyed his movies and books, we have been a bit uncomfortable with his slant on certain facts and figures. In many ways, Moore has been the Limbaugh/Coulter/Hannity for our side�he might be a little selective with the facts, but doesn’t it feel good to hear it?

With all the hype and controversy surrounding the release of Fahrenheit, we weren’t sure exactly what to expect�serious, substantial movie or a cheerleading exercise for the true believers? The answer lies solidly inbetween these two extremes, but make no mistake about it: This is an important film that brings up a lot of serious questions that can’t be dismissed simply by claiming “media bias” or “propaganda”.

While the information presented in Farenheitisn’t perfect (some of the figures, especially about the percentage of Saudi money in the US economy, can be disputed), Moore seems to get a lot more right than wrong. And Fahrenheit offers something entirely unexpected form a Michael Moore film: subtlety. Unlike much of his previous work, Moore stays off-camera for much of Fahrenheit, letting the information and images really speak for themselves. While there were some extremely funny bits (such as Moore reading the Patriot Act through an ice cream truck’s loudspeaker while circling the Capitol), they don’t dominate the film. Instead, such moments give the audience a chance to take a break from what, in lesser hands, could be clumsy and overbearing. The way the movie moves from point to point is a masterwork of editing, and it makes Fahrenheit a much more cohesive and focused effort than Bowling For Columbine was.

While most of the information and arguments Moore presented weren’t revelations to us (after all, we’ve been writing about similar topics since this site started), we can imagine that this film will shock people who watch what passes as news on television. And, details aside, most of the information is hard to dispute on a factual level. For us, the real impact of Fahrenheit lies in the human face it puts on the Iraq conflict. From the scared faces of our troops overseas to the heartbreaking images of a mother who lost her son in the war, Michael Moore reminds us that the Bush Administration’s choices have real, human consequences. Is it manipulative? Sure. But that doesn’t make it any less powerful.

It will be interesting to see how Fahrenheit’s box office numbers hold up in the weeks ahead. Only time will tell if the movie’s reach goes beyond Moore’s traditional fanbase; if it does, then the administration will have a lot to worry about.

(For more commentary on Michael Moore, please read Matt’s recent entry. He makes a lot of excellent points that, to avoid unnecessary repetition, were not used here)