...You can't expect things to change overnight (click here) and there's not time in nine months to fix catastrophes left by the Bush administration. But I don't believe in the tooth fairy or Santa Claus and he might not be able to fix the problems left by Bush and Cheney....
"Bowling for Columbine" is a brilliant film. It contextualized the dynamics of violence in the USA and subliminal legitimacy the American society gives killing.
But.
"Fahrenheit 911" showed it 'in practice,' Michael. It is one thing to realize a society has been so violent its youth finds rewards in it. It is quite a different thing to see it in action.
November 8th, 2009 5:06 PM
The films that defined the noughties
(In case one does not recognize the jargon, 'noughties' is a 'nickname' if you will for the years 2000 through 2009.)
This decade has given rise to a fragmented, pick’n’mix cinematic culture - but what are the top 100 movie masterpieces of the last ten years?
By David Gritten, Tim Robey and Sukhdev Sandhu / Telegraph
Michael Moore, 2004: (click title to entry - thank you)
It may not have been the best film of the decade. It may not have been the best film Moore has made (that honour still belongs to 1989’s Roger and Me). Nevertheless, it’s hard to overstate the importance of this film, a modestly funded political documentary that was shunned by its Disney backers but went on to win the Palme d’Or at Cannes, coin more than $220 million around the world, and boost the emergence of politically liberal, agenda-driven multiplex fare such as Supersize Me and An Inconvenient Truth.
A speculation: might the accessible and populist fashion in which it marshalled its denunciation of George Bush’s 2000 “electoral theft”, to say nothing of the scorn it poured on American neo-conservative support for the “War on Terror”, have helped create or at least re-identify a large chunk of the non-traditional constituencies who were later tapped successfully by the Obama campaign team?
Criticism that Moore played fast and loose with his facts misses the point. He’s an old-fashioned circus barker. He trades in passion not science. But these days, when Tony Blair gets dubbed a “war criminal” and when the US economy is still ailing after the trillions squandered in the Middle East, the questions he asks look like patriotism rather than treachery.
