> Fahrenheit 9-11 - Much more reasonable and well-thought
than I expected. Nevertheless, Fahrenheit lacks the strength and
persuasion of Moore's other documentaries. As usual, Moore's
strength lies in his ability to ask good questions, and to film
people in their emotionally weak moments without undue
interpretation; he allows the people to speak for themselves, and
gives voice-over details when necessary.
> His weaknesses are pronounced in this film, however, and far
more so than in his other films. The fact that this film is so
unabashedly polemical hurts any claim to objectivity in
argument, which in turn calls into question the facts reported,
whether they are flawed or not. And, Moore's Bush-bashing is
the greatest weakness in the film; making fun of someone, with
little reason and much speculation, or showing politicians in
situations that are clearly intended to mock them without any
verbal joke, weakens Moore's arguments because he is so petty.
The ad hominems distract from the good in the film, far more so
than in Bowling for Columbine, for example.
>

I agree. I'm pretty left (On the american scale, anyway), and I
found the ad hominem over the top. A lot of the Bush clips were
just... Well... The guy can't speak, sometimes. Get over it.

Now, the "Watch my drive" clip... That was gold.

But he harped a bit much on his reaction on 9/11. I mean... How
would YOU react? Start jumping up and down? Cry? Throw a
hissyfit?

'tienne