Review: "PAUL MOONEY: Know Your History - Jesus is Black and So is Cleopatra"

TRASH IN MY EYE No. 59 (of 2007) by Leroy Douresseaux

Paul Mooney: Know Your History – Jesus is Black and so is Cleopatra (2007) – video
Running time:  83 minutes (1 hour, 23 minutes)
DIRECTOR:  Bart Phillips
WRITER:  Paul Mooney
PRODUCERS:  Shane Mooney and Malik Levy, Adrian Z. Sosebee, and Shawn Ullman
EDITOR:  Donnie Leapheart

CONCERT - Comedy

Starring:  Paul Mooney

Paul Mooney (August 4, 1941 – May 19, 2021) was an African-American comedian, writer, social critic, and actor.  Mooney was best known for his association with legendary comedian Richard Pryor, writing for and with Pryor.  Later, Mooney gained fame for his appearances on comedian Dave Chappelle's television sketch comedy series, “Chappelle's Show.”

Mooney was a comedian who seemingly loved controversy.  After all, he was also the creator of the character, “Homey the Clown,” for the early 1990’s TV sketch comedy series, “In Living Color.”  Mooney returned to the small screen with the DVD release of his stand-up comedy film, Paul Mooney: Know Your History – Jesus is Black and So is Cleopatra.  Mooney took center stage at Hollywood’s Laugh Factory for a stand-up comedy performance, which was recorded and became this film.

In Paul Mooney: Know Your History – Jesus is Black and So is Cleopatra, Mooney delivered his incendiary brand of comedy.  From the opening moments, he charged into his fiery subjects, which usually included racism, white people, racial tension, and, in this performance, the finer points of Black History.  He talked about divas, living in White America, President George W. Bush, Scientology, and various social and political topics.

Know Your History is edgier, darker, and perhaps a bit more mean-spirited than a previous Mooney DVD release, Paul Mooney: Analyzing White America (2004).  I am sure Analyzing White America was once known as Paul Mooney Live, and it was much funnier than Know Your History...  Still, in this second film, Mooney discussed racism and racial issues in America like no one else, and did so with the passion and honesty that most mainstream American political and social commentators could never match.  For all his bluntness, Know Your History... still had me doubled over with laughter.  Know Your History... is funny, but white people, the politically correct, and the sensitive are warned.  Professor Mooney’s history lesson might burn your mind to a crisp.

The stand-up is interspersed with some documentary footage and also testimonials from a number of celebrities including David Alan Grier, Lori Petty, and Sandra Bernhard, whom Mooney once mentored.  In light of his recent passing (as of this writing), I recommend that you seek out Paul Mooney: Know Your History – Jesus is Black and So is Cleopatra, dear readers.  If you don't know him, Mooney, as sharp social critic, is worth discovering, and if you only know his TV work, here a chance to discover Mooney at his best.

7 of 10
A-

Saturday, March 31, 2007 / Revised Wednesday, May 19, 2021


The text is copyright © 2021 Leroy Douresseaux. All Rights Reserved. Contact this blog or site for reprint and syndication rights and fees.

----------------------

Willie Horton Ad President Who Appointed Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court Gets Special Screening of "Selma"

PARAMOUNT PICTURES HOSTED A SPECIAL SCREENING OF “SELMA” FOR PRESIDENT GEORGE H. W. BUSH AND BARBARA BUSH

HOLLYWOOD, CA (December 11, 2014) – Paramount Pictures hosted a special advance screening of its critically acclaimed upcoming film “SELMA” in Houston on Tuesday, December 9, 2014 for President George H.W. Bush and Barbara Bush and their guests.

“’Selma’ magnificently recreates the strong emotions felt across our nation, vividly taking us back to when Martin Luther King, Jr. led the civil rights movement,” said President Bush. “Together, the filmmakers and cast not only captured the pain and conflict of that challenging time, but also how far we have come as a society – and, in so doing, reminded us how the freedom to protest peacefully and the power of human spirit make America so great.”

Guests included the Bushes’ close family and friends, members of the president’s secret service team and the Barbara Bush Foundation for Family Literacy, and local politicians, among others.

SELMA is the story of a movement. The film chronicles the tumultuous three-month period in 1965, when Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. led a dangerous campaign to secure equal voting rights in the face of violent opposition.  The epic march from Selma to Montgomery culminated in President Johnson (Tom Wilkinson) signing the Voting Rights Act of 1965, one of the most significant victories for the civil rights movement.  Director Ava DuVernay’s SELMA tells the real story of how the revered leader and visionary Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. (David Oyelowo) and his brothers and sisters in the movement prompted change that forever altered history.  Starring David Oyelowo, Tom Wilkinson, Cuba Gooding Jr., Alessandro Nivola, Giovanni Ribisi, Common, Carmen Ejogo, Lorraine Toussaint, with Tim Roth and Oprah Winfrey as “Annie Lee Cooper.”

The film is produced by Christian Colson, Oprah Winfrey, Dede Gardner and Jeremy Kleiner. Written by Paul Webb. Directed by Ava DuVernay.


About Paramount Pictures Corporation
Paramount Pictures Corporation (PPC), a global producer and distributor of filmed entertainment, is a unit of Viacom (NASDAQ: VIAB, VIA), a leading content company with prominent and respected film, television and digital entertainment brands. Paramount controls a collection of some of the most powerful brands in filmed entertainment, including Paramount Pictures, Paramount Animation, Paramount Television, Paramount Vantage, Paramount Classics, Insurge Pictures, MTV Films, and Nickelodeon Movies. PPC operations also include Paramount Home Media Distribution, Paramount Pictures International, Paramount Licensing Inc., and Paramount Studio Group.

Review: "Death of a President" Riveting, Troubling

TRASH IN MY EYE No. 62 (of 2007) by Leroy Douresseaux

Death of a President (2006)
COUNTRY OF ORIGIN:  UK
Running time:  97 minutes (1 hour, 37 minutes)
MPAA – R for brief violent images
DIRECTOR:  Gabriel Range
WRITERS:  Simon Finch and Gabriel Range
PRODUCERS:  Simon Finch, Gabriel Range, and Ed Guiney
CINEMATOGRAPHER:  Graham Smith
EDITOR:  Brand Thumim
COMPOSER:  Richard Harvey

DRAMA/MYSTERY/THRILLER

Starring:  Hend Ayoub, Brian Bolland, Becky Ann Baker, Robert Mangiardi, Jay Patterson, Jay Whittaker, M. Neko Parham, Chavez Ravine, and Malik Bader

In his mock documentary (also known as a “mockumentary”), Death of a President, director Gabriel Range presents a scenario in which U.S. President George W. Bush is assassinated in October of 2007.  Death of the President pretends to be an investigative documentary that examines the key players and events surrounding the killing of President Bush, several years after the as-yet-unsolved murder occurred.

Death of a President follows the events leading up to the assassination and its aftermath, and the film also features a bevy of talking heads, which includes the people around the president, murder suspects, and their families.  In his hypothetical film, Range focuses on the fallout that follows Bush’s murder – specifically the media’s reaction, the rush to convict a Muslim as the assassin, and the machinations of newly installed President Cheney to grab more presidential powers.

Since its appearance at the 2006 Toronto International Film Festival, Death of a President has been highly controversial, and the producers had a difficult time finding a company to distribute the film to U.S. theatres.  Ultimately, Newmarket Films, which handled Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ, distributed the film in the U.S.

I like this movie, although I did find the scenes in which President Bush was shot and the ones occurring at the hospital where he later died to be in poor taste.  Like him or not, he is (as of this writing) a sitting U.S. President, and to portray his death in so brutal and perhaps cavalier fashion is to traffic in mean-spiritedness and carelessness.

On the other hand, what takes place before the assassination and after is riveting stuff.  In the scenes leading up to the shooting, director Gabriel Range creates a riveting thriller that quietly races to its damnable turning point.  After Bush’s death, Range and his co-writer Simon Finch display a knowledge of the American mass media, of law enforcement (in particularly the FBI) and how they work and react to big events that is surprising considering they are not Americans.  Their spin on how Vice-President Dick Cheney would react if he became President after an assassination is dead-on (and maybe a little obvious considering Cheney’s actions as Vice-President).  Who doesn’t think Cheney would move to consolidate more power for himself with a Congress and a country reeling from shock, reluctant to challenge him, and desperate for leadership in such a time of crisis.

Range apparently specializes in these kinds of dramatizations of probable future events, such as his TV film, The Day Britain Stopped (which I’ve never seen).  He’s so-so at presenting interviews with the fictional talking heads involved in the events of Death of a President.  Some of the interviewees don’t come across as authentic, so the film sometimes feels phony.  Still, Range has created an engaging, unforgettable “what if,” and he smartly realizes what is most frightening about a U.S. president being assassinated.  Such an event could very well mean the definite beginning of the certain end of this grand experiment called the United States of America.

7 of 10
B+

Wednesday, April 11, 2007

NOTES:
2007 BAFTA TV Awards:  1 nomination:  “Best Visual Effects”

2007 International Emmy Awards:  1 win: “TV Movie/Mini-Series” (UK)

Updated:  Sunday, November 10, 2013

The text is copyright © 2013 Leroy Douresseaux. All Rights Reserved. Contact this site for syndication rights and fees.

Review: "Iraq in Fragments" Gives Voice to the Voiceless

TRASH IN MY EYE No. 80 (of 2007) by Leroy Douresseaux

Iraq in Fragments (2006)
Running time:  94 minutes (1 hour, 34 minutes)
MPAA – Not rated
DIRECTOR:  James Longley
COMPOSER/CINEMATOGRAPHER:  James Longley
PRODUCERS:  James Longley and John Sinno
EDITORS:  James Longley, Billy McMillin, and Fiona Otway
2007 Academy Award nominee

DOCUMENTARY – War, Politics, Religion

Starring:  Mohammed Haithem and Suleiman Mahmoud

The subject of this movie review is Iraq in Fragments, a 2006 documentary from filmmaker James Longley.  The film offers stories from modern day Iraq, as told by Iraqis living in a time of war, occupation and ethnic tension.

Iraq in Fragments earned an Academy Award nomination.  The film also won 3 awards at the 2006 Sundance Festival:  “Cinematography Award,” “Directing Award,” and “Documentary Film Editing Award,” as well as being nominated for the “Grand Jury Price."

In his Oscar-nominated documentary, Iraq in Fragments, director James Longley presents a portrait of Iraq, a nation divided, one at war with itself after the United States invaded the country won Operation: Iraqi Freedom.  Through a collage of images and commentary from ordinary Iraqis, Longley illuminates post-invasion Iraq in three acts focusing on different regions of the country.

In Part One, entitled “Mohammed of Baghdad,” Mohammed, a fatherless 11-year old boy is apprenticed to a dictatorial garage owner, who is outraged that after several years of schooling Mohammed cannot read.  In, “Sadr’s South,” the followers of cleric Moqtada al-Sadr rally for regional elections, but also enforce Islamic law at the point of a gun, which some residents see as similar to things Saddam Hussein did and the American are doing.  In the final act, “Kurdish Spring,” a family of farmers welcome the American presence because it brings them a measure of freedom Kurdistan never knew, but one boy, Suleiman, will still see his dreams of an education dashed as he remains trapped in his elderly father’s meager occupations as a sheepherder and brick maker.

Through these interviews with Iraqis (although neither his nor his translators’ voices are ever heard), Longley, via words and images, captures the discord in the war-torn country – both in the abstract and in the literal that give the effects of war, political unrest, religious feuds deeper meaning.  In this way, Longley helps the audience to understand how living in uncertainty and deepening poverty drags on the people physically and spiritually.

Sometimes, the film seems to hunger for a historical context (especially when an Iraqi subject mentions distant historical events), and the near-absence of Americans in this documentary is noticeable.  That doesn’t really hurt Iraq in Fragment, for it remains a riveting film in which the images and subjects stick with you in an insistent fashion.  Besides, with this documentary, Longley forces us (at least the ones who do bother to see Iraq in Fragments) to do something more Americans should – see things from the ordinary Iraqi’s perspective.

8 of 10
A

NOTES:
2007 Academy Awards:  1 nomination for “Best Documentary, Features,” (James Longley and John Sinno)

Monday, May 21, 2007

Updated, Wednesday, September 11, 2013

The text is copyright © 2013 Leroy Douresseaux. All Rights Reserved. Contact this site for syndication rights and fees.

Review: "The Road to Guantanamo" a Sign Post on the Road to Damnation

e

TRASH IN MY EYE No. 231 (of 2006) by Leroy Douresseaux

The Road to Guantanamo (2006)
COUNTRY OF ORIGIN: UK; Languages: English and Urdu
Running time: 95 minutes (1 hour, 35 minutes)
MPAA – R for language and disturbing violent content
DIRECTORS: Michael Winterbottom and Mat Whitecross
PRODUCERS: Andrew Eaton, Melissa Parmenter, and Michael Winterbottom
CINEMATOGRAPHER: Marcel Zyskind
EDITORS: Mat Whitecross and Michael Winterbottom

DRAMA/DOCUMENTARY

Starring: Riz Ahmed, Farhad Harun, Waqar Siddiqui, Afran Usman, and as themselves: Asif Iqbal, Ruhel Ahmed, and Shafiq Rasul

Part documentary and part drama, The Road to Guantanamo presents the true story of three British Muslim men, known as “the Tipton Three,” who were arrested in Afghanistan and unjustly held for more than two years in two U.S. detention camps at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

September 2001: an immigrant from Pakistan living in Tipton, Birmingham, England, Asif (Afran Usman) is informed by his father than he is of the age in which he must marry, so Asif heads to Pakistan to meet his betrothed. Asif’s friends: Ruhel (Farhad Harun), Shafiq (Riz Ahmed), and Monir (Waqar Siddiqui) agree to accompany him to Pakistan. While there, the quartet decides to cross the border into Afghanistan just as United States begins its bombing campaign to topple the Taliban, Afghanistan’s ruling government, because it gave aid and comfort to Al-Qaeda and its leader Osama bin Laden, which the U.S. held responsible for the attacks against the U.S. on September 11, 2001.

During the chaos, Monir disappears and Asif, Ruhel, and Shafiq are captured by the Northern Alliance. They are flown by American military to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where they are imprisoned in Camp X-Ray and, later, Camp Delta. This is the first hand account of their experiences in Afghanistan and of their experiences during the two years the U.S. military held them prisoners at Guantanamo until they were released.

Director Michael Winterbottom and co-director Mat Whitecross blend dramatic reenactments, interviews with the surviving men, and archive news footage into a gripping docudrama that is a blunt expose of the out-of-control security measures that came about after 9/11. One’s feelings about this movie will depend in large part upon which side of the political spectrum one resides. If you think that the administration of President George W. Bush was correct in its attempt to skirt the Geneva Convention in regards to “enemy combatants” (which is what the administration dubbed Al-Qaeda fighters), then, you may not like The Road to Guantanamo. If you think that this administration has long been out of control, acted like war criminals, and/or broken both U.S. and international law, then, you may like this quite a bit.

Beyond politics, this film is a harrowing tale of what happens when people are falsely imprisoned. The Road to Guantanamo depicts how cruel it is to be lost in a bureaucracy that just won’t stop and listen, especially when a little extra concern on the part of American officials would have relieved this trio of much suffering.

Winterbottom and Whitecross’ choice to reenact the young men’s experiences and blend them with interviews of the actual young men themselves gives the tale, if not outright validity, then, certainly high drama. The directors engage us with their approach, and the actors in the reenactments give a rawness to their performances that in turn give their scenes a sense of verisimilitude. Although it seems a bit light and shallow at times, The Road to Guantanamo is a great story, and rather than read what I have to say about this movie, it’s best to let the real storytellers transport you to their harrowing world of imprisonment.

8 of 10
A

Friday, November 10, 2006

Review: "Taxi to the Dark Side" Chases the Truth

TRASH IN MY EYE No. 90 (of 2010) by Leroy Douresseaux

Taxi to the Dark Side (2007)
Running time: 106 minutes (1 hour, 46 minutes)
MPAA – R for disturbing images, and content involving torture and graphic nudity
WRITER/DIRECTOR: Alex Gibney
PRODUCERS: Alex Gibney, Eva Orner, and Susannah Shipman
CINEMATOGRAPHER: Maryse Alberti and Greg Andracke
EDITOR: Sloane Klevin
Academy Award winner

DOCUMENTARY

Starring: Alex Gibney (narrator), Moazzam Begg, Pfc. Willie Brand, Pfc. Jack Cloonan, Damien M. Corsetti, Sgt. Thomas Curtis Carlotta Gall, Tim Golden, Tony Lagouranis, Sen. Carl Levin, Anthony Morden, Dan Mori, Spc. Glendale C. Wallis, Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, John Yoo, and George W. Bush (archival footage)

Taxi to the Dark Side is a 2007 documentary film from director Alex Gibney (Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room). It won the “Best Documentary, Features” Oscar at the 2008 Academy Awards. Taxi to the Dark Side takes an in-depth look at the torture practices of the United States in Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantanamo Bay. The focal point for this film is the 2002 death of Dilawar, a 22-year-old Afghan taxi driver from the village of Yakubi.

More than a year after the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan, Dilawar and his three passengers were taken into custody at a checkpoint on a U.S. base. On December 5, 2002, Dilawar arrived at the prison facility at Bagram Air Base. He was declared dead five days later, and he turned out not to be an enemy combatant or terrorist. An investigation would also uncover that Dilawar was tortured and that his death was the result of assaults and attacks visited upon him by U.S. interrogators at Bagram.

From Dilawar’s death, Taxi to the Dark Side examines changes in U.S. policy toward detainees and suspects after 9/11, America’s policy on torture and interrogation (with a specific look at the CIA’s roll), and research into torture and sensory deprivation used by the CIA and the U.S. military. Gibney interviews numerous players, political figures, experts, military officials and personnel for this film. That includes the soldiers involved in Dilawar’s death, their attorneys, and military experts. The director also interviews Moazzam Begg; he is a British citizen held at Bagram during the time of Dilawar’s detention and death, who was also later held at Guantanamo Bay, before being released.

For all the area that it covers, Taxi to the Dark Side tries to get at the heart of America’s use of torture and how it interrogates detainees during the Global War on Terror. This movie has a central question. Was Dilawar’s death the result of a few “bad apples,” as in low-ranking officers and ground level soldiers, or was his death the result of the implementation of a new worldwide system of interrogation. Gibney argues that whatever the “bad apples” did, they were following orders that came down the chain of command, beginning at highest levels of the U.S. government and military.

Gibney does not only focus on the tragedy and crime of Dilawar’s death. He is like a journalist, asking who, what, when, why, and how. Gibney searches long and hard so that he can tell us everything about torture. How is torture defined? What acts constitute torture? What are the recent techniques in interrogation of prisoners and what are their origins? Who are the players that make the decisions? Who is to blame – the interrogator or the one who gives the orders to torture and to abuse?

Taxi to the Dark Side is both a piece of complex journalism and the kind of great documentary that captures the imagination. It is smart, almost scholarly, but it is also hot and passionate. Alex Gibney’s films are usually smart, but they can own your attention and imagination just as well as any Hollywood event movie. And Taxi to the Dark Side needs our attention – for our own good.

9 of 10
A+

NOTES:
2008 Academy Awards: 1 win: “Best Documentary, Features” (Alex Gibney and Eva Orner)

Saturday, November 06, 2010

---------------

"Capitalism: A Love Story" Shows No Love for Greed

TRASH IN MY EYE No. 88 (of 2010) by Leroy Douresseaux

Capitalism: A Love Story (2009)
Running time: 127 minutes (2 hours, 7 minutes)
MPAA – R for some language
WRITER/DIRECTOR: Michael Moore
PRODUCERS: Anne Moore and Michael Moore
CINEMATOGRAPHER: Daniel Marracino and Jayme Roy
EDITORS: Jessica Brunetto, Alex Meillier, Tanya Meillier, Conor O'Neill, Pablo Proenza, T. Woody Richman, and John Walter

DOCUMENTARY

Starring: Michael Moore, William Black, US Congressman Elijah Cummings, Sheriff Warren Evans, Bishop Thomas Gumbleton, Wallace Shawn, and Elizabeth Warren

Capitalism: A Love Story is a 2009 documentary film by author and director, Michael Moore. The film focuses on the financial crisis that began in 2007 (and continued into 2010) and indicts capitalism and the current economic order of the United States. Moore details how capitalism via corporations dominates the lives of Americans and the rest of the world (by default).

Moore’s film travels around the country, especially Middle America, detailing how the excesses of capitalism and corporate greed have damaged, even destroyed the lives of some Americans. Moore attempts to enter the halls of power in Washington D.C. and the global financial epicenter in Manhattan, specifically Wall Street, to discuss greed and government bailouts. Capitalism: A Love Story’s topics include corporate-owned life insurance (called “dead peasants insurance), for-profit prisons, home foreclosures and evictions, the influence of Goldman Sachs in Washington D.C., modern worker strikes, Wall Street’s “casino mentality,” and more. The film asks several questions, but the most prominent being, what is the price that America pays for its love of capitalism? The film also has a religious component in which Moore wonders if capitalism is a sin and if Jesus would have been a capitalist.

Obviously the title, Capitalism: A Love Story, is a misnomer, but this isn’t a hate story. Moore examines “unfettered and unregulated” capitalism and also how modern capitalism is defined by greed, an insatiable lust for money, and the tendency to view everything and everyone as a commodity – all subject to exploitation. Moore is more than just a documentary filmmaker; he is also a crusader. As such he presents evidence and information specifically designed to prove his point – in this case that capitalism is destructive and evil – and also to get his audience politically aware and socially active.

Sometimes, Moore’s own actions in his movies come across as stunts – like his antics on Wall Street and near Congress in this movie. In Capitalism: A Love Story, this only serves to hurt the movie’s credibility and also makes him look more like a prankster than a documentary filmmaker. Like Fahrenheit 9/11, Capitalism: A Love Story avoids perfection because of its creator’s tendency to clown.

Still, Moore dazzles with his ability to tell stories about the struggles and suffering of ordinary working Americans. He is also one of the best American filmmakers working today. Impressive storytelling and exceptional technical skills are the calling cards of this brilliant movie director. When such a director tackles our nation’s most pressing issues, we should pay attention because it matters.

8 of 10
A

NOTES:
2010 Image Awards: 1 nomination: “Award Outstanding Documentary (Theatrical or Television)”

Sunday, October 31, 2010

Fahrenheit 9/11 a Tour de Force

TRASH IN MY EYE No. 146 (of 2004) by Leroy Douresseaux

Fahrenheit 9/11 (2004)
Running time: 122 minutes (2 hours, 2 minutes)
MPAA – R for some violent and disturbing images, and for language
WRITER/DIRECTOR: Michael Moore
PRODUCERS: Jim Czarnecki, Kathleen Glynn, and Michael Moore
EDITORS: Kurt Engfehr, T. Woody Richman, and Christopher Seward

DOCUMENTARY/WAR

Starring: George W. Bush, Lila Lipscomb, and Michael Moore

His detractors have called documentary filmmaker Michael Moore everything from a polemist to a propagandist. The Oscar® winning director (Bowling for Columbine) is the best known American documentary movie maker, even better known than such acclaimed talents as Ken Burns and Errol Morris. In the late spring of 2004, Moore debuted is most controversial work to date, Fahrenheit 9/11, in which Moore aims his camera squarely at the administration and policies of U.S. President George W. Bush.

Fahrenheit 9/11 details the connections between the Bush family and various Saudi Arabian oil interests, especially the bin Laden family – ironic considering that Bush and the bin Laden family member who is the alleged architect of the September 11, 2001 attacks on America, Osama bin Laden, are now mortal enemies. The film also takes a look at what happened after 9/11/2001, and how the Bush administration used the tragic event to push its agenda. Moore’s claims include accusations that Bush family and business associates have greatly benefited monetarily from the subsequent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq through government military and petrochemical contracts. Fahrenheit 9/11 later takes a look at the affects of combat in Iraq on the soldiers and Iraqi citizens, and Moore interviews Lila Lipscomb, a proud and patriotic mother whose son dies in Iraq.

Unlike Moore’s films, Roger & Me and the aforementioned Columbine, Moore, as a character, does not make many on-screen appearances in Fahrenheit. Fahrenheit 9/11 is more focused than the Academy Award-winning Columbine because Moore has to spend a great deal of the film detailing his arguments, especially in the film’s first half. The first hour or so of Fahrenheit 9/11 is where Moore makes his arguments that George Bush and his cronies and administration used the war to enact government and social policies that they wanted to force on Americans all along and that the terrorist attacks on the U.S. gave them the opening they needed. Moore claims that ultimately the war in Iraq was more about the Hand Puppet’s administration’s desire to make money than protecting the U.S. What makes Michael Moore’s argument convincing is that he culls so much archival news footage, photographs, and video from recent news conferences. Thus, the subjects of his film do the vast majority of the talking and inadvertently convict themselves and prove Moore’s points.

The first half of Fahrenheit 9/11, when it focuses on George Bush, is outrageous and hilarious. Michael Moore has the gift of being both subtle and blunt when it comes to humor. His satire has the precision of a scalpel, and he presents arguments with the blunt force of a fist; he is brutal and relentless. Considering how so many Hollywood directors of comedies now rely on childish gross out jokes to sell their “humor,” Moore is likely the smartest film director of humor in America. He uses President Bush and his associates like hapless sock puppets for his jokes, all the while he expertly delineates their follies.

The second half of Fahrenheit 9/11 is a bit of a downer, as Moore takes his camera to Iraq to interview soldiers. He also interviews a soldier’s mother from his hometown of Flint, Michigan. Although many critics have claimed that Michael Moore portrayed the American servicemen and servicewomen as villains, I found that to be otherwise. The little time the soldiers are on camera, Moore shows warts and all, but the soldiers come out looking like humans and not killing machines. They make mistakes and do ugly things, but Moore shows them as the heroes – guys and girls just doing their jobs. If the job is wrong, it’s not by their hands, but it’s on the people who sent them there.

The other segment of Fahrenheit 9/11 that’s really hard to watch is Moore’s time spent with Lila Lipscomb, the mother of a slain soldier. His camera takes such an intimate look at her life surrounding her son’s service in Iraq that when tragedy strikes, the viewer also feels the pain.

As good as Moore is at making documentaries, he also uses film to make commentary, and he uses film as if he were an essayist. He’s also part of that other group of journalists, reporters, storytellers, etc. who go beyond the safe borders where mainstream American media won’t go. Michael Moore just happens to be the loudest source of alternative information concerning politics and society, and Fahrenheit 9/11 may be his most accomplished work. Still, it’s by no means perfect; sometimes the film looses focus (as during his visit with two Oregon state troopers). However, Fahrenheit 9/11 is a sign of even greater things to come from Moore, and it’s one of the best films of the year.

9 of 10
A+

NOTES:
2004 Cannes Film Festival: 2 wins: “FIPRESCI Prize Competition” (Michael Moore) and Golden Palm or “Palme d’Or” (Michael Moore)