[lit-ideas] Re: fahreheit
- From: dsavory@xxxxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 11:50:28 -0700
Yes, Walter's right. When I wrote "you could take a child to see it but you'd
have to debrief" I should have put "could" in italics. There's some non-too-
pleasant stuff in there (unlike Supersize Me in which it's sort of funny to
watch Morgan Spurlock throw up.)
> Some scenes are difficult enough for adults. I wouldn't bring a 12 yr. old
> to that movie.
>
> Cheers, Walter
>
> Memorial U
>
>
> Phone: 709-737-7613
> Fax: 709-737-2345
> E-mail: wokshevs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 JulieReneB@xxxxxxx wrote:
>
> > Since you've seen it perhaps you can answer a pragmatic question. Jim
> an=
> d I
> > plan to see it some evening this week. My 12 year old daughter wants
> > desperately to accompany us. The discussion of it w/ Peter Jennings (or
> =
> someone) led
> > me to believe that it includes a fair amount of explicit war violence
> fro=
> m
> > footage in Iraq. My daughter has not exactly been sheltered (her father
> =
> w/out my
> > knowledge allowed her to watch Ghost Ship (I think I mentioned here once)
> > which, when I found out what it was, horrified me). But again I'm back
> t=
> o the
> > discussion of what the difference is between children watching what they
> =
> know to
> > be pretend violence in a fictional film and watching real violence
> (remem=
> ber
> > the teachers who allowed the Nick Berg footage to be watched in their
> > classrooms).... How bad is the violence and how much is there?
> > Julie Krueger
> >
> > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3DOriginal Message=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> > Subj:[lit-ideas] fahreheit
> > Date:6/28/2004 7:16:24 PM Central Daylight Time
> > From:dsavory@xxxxxxxxx
> > To:lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Sent on:
> >
> >
> > I saw Fahrenheit 9/11. I think =E2=80=9CBowling for Columbine=E2=80=9D
> wa=
> s better. (I think
> > Morgan Spurlock=E2=80=99s =E2=80=9CSupersize Me=E2=80=9D was better than
> =
> both of them.)
> >
> > There are, however, plenty of sound bites cleverly edited to convince
> you=
> if
> > you weren=E2=80=99t convinced already that Dubya is indeed a moron and
> no=
> t just
> > someone who can be rendered inarticulate with a newscamera in his face.
> B=
> ut
> > come on, has there been a softer target in the history of politics than
> B=
> ush?
> > And the problem with American foreign policy is surely not that there is
> =
> a
> > moron at the helm but that it follows the same pattern of exploitation,
> > humiliation and oppression as it has for over one hundred years with Bush
> > doing exactly what every other president has done.
> >
> > Fahrenheit 9/11 is a little scattershot: Moore is so full of anger he
> doe=
> sn=E2=80=99t
> > develop a coherent case. Unlike Chomsky who marshalls facts into a
> series=
> of
> > objections that are at least consistent within a singular theme, Moore is
> > kind
> > of all over the map. He presents someone claiming there are more cops in
> > Manhattan than troops in Afghanistan attempting to root out Osama bin
> Lad=
> en,
> > but what=E2=80=99s the point? Should there have twice as many troops
> depl=
> oyed? Ten
> > times? He makes a lot of ominous connections between the Saudi royal
> fami=
> ly
> > and the Bush family and leaves us with the =E2=80=9Cstunner=E2=80=9D
> that=
> Saudis own
> > something
> > like 7% of America but what=E2=80=99s the point? That Osama bin Laden
> (wh=
> o is
> > actually
> > quite close to all the other bin Ladens) would destroy something that
> the=
> y
> > have a huge financial stake in? Are we supposed to think Osama is as
> stup=
> id
> > as
> > Dubya?
> >
> > Still, Moore does some things pretty well. I think he makes a nice case
> t=
> hat
> > the soldiers in the war are not very clear why they=E2=80=99re in Iraq
> an=
> d he does a
> > really nice job with a woman who went from being pro-war to anti-war
> afte=
> r
> > her
> > son was killed. This proves the charge that he=E2=80=99s anti-soldier is
> =
> wrong.
> >
> > It=E2=80=99s appropriately funny in spots and horrifying in others but
> th=
> is should
> > have been a deeper dissection of the corporatist assumptions that govern
> =
> the
> > political culture in Washington not a driveby bash at a moron.
> >
> > David Savory
> > Vancouver
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> > digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> > digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
>
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
