F9/11 in NYC.

It's probably only natural that on the day the year's first or second most controversial movie - looks like it's still a dead heat between the evisceration of Jesus and the evisceration of Bush - opens in New York and two days before it opens in over 860 theaters, there'd be a lot to point to; hence, yet another entry given over entirely to Fahrenheit 9/11.

Best to begin with Eugene Hernandez's wrap-up of the latest news at indieWIRE, focusing on the MPAA's ruling against the appeal to switch the film's rating from R to PG-13.

Both Movie City News and the New York Times have now set up special sections for coverage of Michael Moore's doc.

And it's via MCN that we find Chris Parry over at Hollywood Bitchslap taking on the task of foraging through Christopher Hitchens's "rambling" piece. It's a quick job, to be sure, but there you go. For more rapid-fire response - and there's plenty - browse Slate's Fray.

Matt Langdon, by the way, has a photo of Hitchens and Moore's first "onstage debate" at Telluride. Both look like they're having just a fabulous time. Writes Matt: "Hitchens smoked incessantly and talked in a low, rough voice while Moore played the crowd like a violin." But here's the stuff to savor: Hate mail sent to theaters showing the movie. If words were deeds...

A few reviews:

• Kenneth Turan in the Los Angeles Times: "It is propaganda, no doubt about it, but propaganda is most effective when it has elements of truth, and too much here is taken from the record not to have a devastating effect on viewers."
• AO Scott in the NYT: "If Fahrenheit 9/11 consisted solely of talking heads and unflattering glimpses of public figures, it would be, depending on your politics, either a rousing call to arms or an irresponsible provocation, but it might not persuade you to re-examine your assumptions. But the movie is much more than Dude, Where's My Country carried out by other means. It is worth seeing, debating and thinking about, regardless of your political allegiances." Also in the NYT, Felicia R Lee on how the PR campaign's going.
• Both New York Observer film critics chime in. Andrew Sarris calls the film "a mixed bag, and you take the bad with the good. In fact, you have to take the bad for the sake of the good.... I urge all my readers to see the film and judge it for yourselves." Rex Reed: "I think it should be required viewing for every American, but as usual, I fear the people who could learn the most from the issues it raises will avoid it like a fund-raiser for free abortions."
• Peter Rainer in New York: "[S]ince Moore’s stated intention with this movie is to drive Bush out in November, perhaps he is right in pushing agitprop over art. So allow me to rescind all my objections and state unequivocally that everybody should see Fahrenheit 9/11 because it is the greatest movie ever made. Whatever helps."

John Gorenfeld in Salon: "Just as the energetic conservative elves succeeded in making Bill Clinton ever more popular with the American public, so do they seem to be driving up public interest in Moore's film." Also, Andrew O'Hehir: "Everybody who meets Michael Moore gets a story out of it; here's mine." And Stephanie Zacharek: "[E]ven though I'm part of the choir Moore is preaching to, I can't help blanching at his approach."

David Poland refutes Michael Moore's version of how those final days leading up to distribution deal actually went.

Michael Moore (or site editor David Shankula) shoots down Michael Isikoff's criticisms of the film in Newsweek, point by point.

Good thing Eisner wouldn't have anything to do with the film. We'd hate to think one of the world's largest media conglomerates harbors a bias of any sort, one way or the other. Which makes it doubly refreshing to read in WorldNetDaily that Disney will be giving away free Bible study guides to promote America's Heart & Soul.

Four pieces in the San Francisco Bay Guardian:

• Moore's style rubs Johnny Ray Huston the wrong way. He would have preferred the approach Kevin Rafferty and James Ridgeway took in Feed, still a "penetrating, even prophetic historical work" 12 years on. Fine. In the long run, Feed may be regarded as the superior work; but even this raucous year, it wouldn't have played in multiplexes in Kansas.
• B Ruby Rich reshuffles the argument she made in Sight & Sound: "I thank Moore for dispensing Geritol to a tired left. But I want more: I want the smoking gun I somehow believed Fahrenheit 9/11 would produce."
• Susan Gerhard places the film in the context of Moore's other work and not only breaks ranks by actually wishing there were more of him in F9/11, but also eloquently notes that "it's still Moore's Michigan that is reliably, oddly, front and center."
• Camille T Taiara covers the Move America Forward angle.

Steve Rosenbaum: "So I left angry. But not angry with George Bush. Or Donald Rumsfeld. Or Ashcroft. Or Condi Rice. I was angry at myself. This isn't anyone else’s country. It's mine. And this Government doesn't act in a vacuum."

Posted by dwhudson at June 23, 2004 1:08 PM