MemeMachineGo!

Pocahontas and I went to see a 4:30 showing of Fahrenheit 9/11 on Friday. As we passed the library, a block from the California Theatre, I said “Is that the line?”

A crowd thronged outside. The showing was sold out. A lame showing like 4:30 on a Friday. All the rest of the day’s showings were sold out, too. So we bought tickets for 4:30, Saturday.

When Pocahontas got home from work on Saturday, I was napping. She woke me at 3:12, saying “We’ve gotta go!” I kvetched and complained about being awakened that early for a 4:30 show — it only takes 15 minutes to bike downtown. Then we got there. The line around the corner into the alley next to the theatre, and doubled back on itself. “OK,” I admitted. “You were right.”

A woman walked around with a clipboard calling on people to register to vote. I didn’t see any takers. Chyeah, like any of us weren’t registered. (I still extend my graditude to her for making the effort.)

The theatre was packed; the air conditioning couldn’t keep up. I sweated through the whole movie. I have never seen a movie opening like this in Berkeley. (Of course, I’m not usually one to rush to opening weekends, and it’s often the case that the biggest blockbusters don’t open in Berkeley, but in huge theatres in Emeryville or Oakland.)

It’s a well-crafted rant, good for riling up people who were already pissed off. I find it hard to imagine it changing anyone’s mind. There’s not much new material here for someone who reads a lot of lefty blogs, which is also to say that I saw no errors of fact (save one,) and that most of the content I know to be a matter of public record (the spin and innuendo are a different matter.) But I’m pretty sure a Fox News viewer would be alternating between “That’s not true!” and “But that’s not what’s important!”

One thing that was edifying for me: since I don’t watch TV, I hadn’t heard Bush quotes I’d read about, like his inability to utter “shame on me,” even when it meant mangling the adage he was supposed to be quoting, or “This is an impressive crowd. The haves and the have-mores. Some people call you the elite. I call you my base.”

A few bits I wasn’t thrilled with. After providing specific evidence with video of Bush and Bush Sr.’s close ties to Saudis, he has a montage of dozens of instances of the two of them meeting with Arabs, without identifying the players or circumstances, or providing any context. It struck me that he was inviting the audience to respond: “Look! They hang out with towelheads! They’re bad!”

In the same part, he suggested that the Bushes had Saudi interests more closely at heart than the American people’s, given that the latter pay $400,000 a year, and the former had given $1.4 billion to them, their friends, and their family over the past three decades (if I recall correctly.) Well, when “give” includes “invests in companies associated with” and the recipients expand to include unspecified “friends,” I find the point diluted to meaninglessness. (I’m not saying that Moore’s case here couldn’t be made; I’m saying he failed to do so in a convincing manner.)

He also mocks members of the “Coalition of the Willing,” for being, you know, small, laughable countries. The administration’s crowing over the vast international support for the war deserves mockery. But the nations themselves deserve better than being reduced to a cheap laugh line. Of the countries he singled out for sneering at, I don’t recall any that actually have troops in Iraq — he pretty much ignores there having been any soldiers from other countries there.

After seeing the movie, I read Christopher Hitchens’ rant, which I find to be much much less fair than the movie. Scott hits most of my objections. Some of Hitchens’ complaints are a fair cop: Moore attacks some actions whose opposite would also have been easy to attack (although some of Hitchens’ examples of this are ridiculous — no one would have criticized Bush for cutting short his schoolroom visit when he learned the first tower had been hit, instead of sitting around for 7 minutes.)

Another of Hitchens’ objections is what I’d count as the error of fact I alluded to above: Moore’s assertion that Hussein’s Iraq had never threatened or killed an American isn’t defensible. That they weren’t a current threat to America at large, sure. That Bushco knew that and lied about it, sure. But Moore’s statement as given isn’t true.

Complaints aside, it’s an effective and moving polemic. I’m glad to have seen it. I’m glad it’s breaking records. I’m glad that local theatres are failing to enforce the 17-year-old restriction for R-rated movies. I’m concerned that a right-wing group is trying to use a campaign advertising law to block advertising for the movie after July 30, but their attempt seems problematic, and Moore is smug about it. I’m glad it’s out there and it’s making Moore rich, and enriching the managers of the theatres showing it, despite a threatened boycott.

I’m glad Moore’s out there, and I’ll stand in line for the next one.