Reviewing Fahrenheit 9/11 is a somewhat thankless task. Epic amounts of paper and server space have already been devoted to analyzing the work from every imaginable perspective, suggesting that original scholarship on the subject has been effectively prescribed. Those few interesting and cogent insights that have or will be made are, for the most part, condemned to be ignored or dismissed by a polarized audience that has no interest in engaging in complexities regarding the subject at hand. This said, hope springs eternal.
In Fahrenheit 9/11, Moore brilliantly culls together an assortment of devastating details to eviscerate the second Bush administration’s preparation for and response to terrorist activities. Moore sharpens this critique by eschewing some of the more grandiose and contentious claims he has previously made regarding 9/11 (e.g. Saudi Arabia was directly responsible for 9/11).
Some critics have made the misguided claim that Moore’s factual details are dangerously absent of “fact.” Although from a legal perspective Moore’s evidence – the grieving American mother who lost her child in Iraq or depictions of mutilated American bodies in Iraq– would no doubt be excluded from a trial, this is not because the “testimony” is false, but rather because the images are so compelling, and thus prejudicial, as to preclude rational consideration of the topic at hand. Moore bombards one with these varied moments, both heart wrenching and nauseating, until one is essentially compelled to agree with him.
Unfortunately, the strength of details in Fahrenheit 9/11 serve to prevent Moore from piecing together a coherent theory of US-Iraqi conflict in the 21st century. Although Moore is supremely effective at destroying myths in this film - George W. Bush is a decisive leader, Congress engages in significant debate with respect to significant legislation – he cannot affirmatively put forth a plausible why explanation for the foreign policy decisions in question. The grand emphasis placed on Saudi/Bush relations is interesting but not illuminating. To tell us something truly significant about US foreign policy specific to the Bush family, Moore must explain why US/Saudi relations remained significantly unchanged during the 8 year Clinton reign.
Simply because Moore is not able to cobble together an all-encompassing theory with respect to US foreign policy does not take away from the film’s many cogent insights, however. In one particularly telling vignette, Moore accompanies two military recruiters as they head to a mall seeking to coerce young (often minority) males into service. Moore’s argument is both reasonable and chilling: by effectively denying adequate educational and economic resources to all its citizens, the US ensures that its “volunteer” army will always be fully staffed. It is this sort of populist insight that audiences have come to expect from Moore, and Fahrenheit 9/11 does not disappointment.
peter beck
yes, it's true: Daniel Fahrenheit not only created the Fahrenheit temperature scale, but he was also the first person to put mercury into thermometers.
