The film that could end Bush's presidency
American movie critics might be carping about Fahrenheit 9/11 being more of a propaganda film than a documentary, but that has not stopped audiences rushing to see it. The vehemently anti-Bush film, directed by Michael Moore, is now the highest-grossing documentary of all time, and is the first non-fiction film to earn more than US$100 million.
It has succeeded in becoming what is known as an 'event' movie. People feel obliged to see it so that they are not left out of discussions at dinner parties or work. And certainly this week, you can bet that Moore's film will be on the lips of many Democratic loyalists descending on Boston for their party convention to formally nominate Massachusetts Senator John Kerry, the man whom they hope will dethrone President George W. Bush.
So is Fahrenheit 9/11 a documentary or a propaganda film, and does it have the power to affect the result of November's election? Well, it is certainly not a standard documentary which puts forward both points of view. Moore gives Mr Bush's camp no space to respond to his allegations. He uses television clips, interviews and even bits of old films to make the point that Mr Bush is running the US government - and the Iraq war - to suit the interests of himself and his Saudi Arabian business friends, rather than the American people.
But while it may deviate from the objective format of a typical television documentary, that does not make it propaganda. Moore himself describes his film as 'op-ed', and says that 'it's my opinion based on facts'. His opinion may be unwelcome to some, but his facts seem to have been well-checked.
There is one omission - Moore does not mention Britain as part of the 'coalition of the willing' - and one misleading inference. But an examination of the facts in USA Today only found two to be 'controversial', and these turned out to be minor, numerical details. Even The Washington Post concluded that the film was 'well-argued'.
Because of the failure of the US media after the September 11 terrorist attacks, the film may be creating a bigger fuss than it might have otherwise. After the attacks, the US media voluntarily went into patriotic mode and failed to analyse or criticise the actions of the government. So, the 'shocking' images and assertions in Fahrenheit 9/11 - like pictures of Iraqi civilian and US army casualties - have not been seen or heard by the American people. Will the film affect the result of the election? It certainly could. Before it was released, most pundits thought that only left-of-centre Democrats would show up to see it. But that has not happened. While there have been no scientific reports, anecdotal evidence suggests that it is drawing crowds from a broad demographic spectrum across the whole country.
Democrats who already agree with its views will find it a tonic. Disillusioned Republicans - and there are many - may decide to stay at home on voting day. The undecided may be persuaded to show up and cast their votes for Senator Kerry, as may some of independent candidate Ralph Nader's supporters.
Moore claims that the film is not supportive of the Democrats, whom he chastens for not standing up to Mr Bush over the Iraq war. In fact, its effect on polling day may be limited by the fact that it sends a negative message, not a positive one. 'Anyone but Bush' may not be as persuasive as 'Vote for Kerry'.
But whatever the outcome, it will certainly have encouraged debate about issues that would otherwise have been kept below the radar of the average American voter.
Richard James Havis is a New York-based film writer
