QandO

June 21, 2004

Incinerating Michael Moore
Posted by McQ

You might get the idea, reading Christopher Hitchens' review of Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" that perhaps Hitchens wasn't that enamored with it. In fact, he flat flames it:

With Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11, however, an entirely new note has been struck. Here we glimpse a possible fusion between the turgid routines of MoveOn.org and the filmic standards, if not exactly the filmic skills, of Sergei Eisenstein or Leni Riefenstahl.

To describe this film as dishonest and demagogic would almost be to promote those terms to the level of respectability. To describe this film as a piece of crap would be to run the risk of a discourse that would never again rise above the excremental. To describe it as an exercise in facile crowd-pleasing would be too obvious. Fahrenheit 9/11 is a sinister exercise in moral frivolity, crudely disguised as an exercise in seriousness. It is also a spectacle of abject political cowardice masking itself as a demonstration of "dissenting" bravery.

And he's just warming up. Go read it.

ADDENDUM (Dale): MQ and I both blogged this, but since he was first, I just thought I'd delete my post and add it here.

The bit McQ quoted is just the intro. Not only does Hitch savage the film, he notes the Moore has developed a "quick response team" in order to launch defamation suits against anyone who criticizes his new project.

Hitch is unimpressed.

However, I think we can agree that the film is so flat-out phony that "fact-checking" is beside the point. And as for the scary lawyers—get a life, or maybe see me in court. But I offer this, to Moore and to his rapid response rabble. Any time, Michael my boy. Let's redo Telluride. Any show. Any place. Any platform. Let's see what you're made of.

Hitch painstakingly rips Farhenheit 9/11 apart for factual errors, logical inconsistencies, and flat out contradictions of Michael Moore's previously stated opinions. It's as if he's daring Moore to sue him.

Or hoping.

TrackBack