Fahrenheit 9/11
List Price:
Our Price: $0.99
You Save: $13.95 (93%)
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Buy Used: from $0.01 (click here)
Category: DVD
See more DVD releases
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
DVD Cover Information
Actor: James Baker III, James Bath, John Ashcroft (II), Khalil Bin Laden, Stephen G. BreyerDVD: Region Code 99
Audio: English (Subtitled); English (Original Language), Dolby Digital 5.1
Format: AC-3, Anamorphic, Closed-captioned, Color, Dolby, DVD, NTSC, Subtitled, Widescreen
Picture Format: Anamorphic Widescreen, 1.78:1
Running Time: 122 minutes
DVD Release Date: 2004-10-05
Audience Rating: R (Restricted)
Studio: Sony Pictures Home Entertainment
Movie Reviews of Fahrenheit 9/11
Movie Review: Extremely important subject, tainted by poor film making
Summary: 5 Stars
First, I give this 5 stars because of the subject matter and the subject matter's importance, AND the supplemental interviews and DVD extras; but not for the quality of the documentary filmmaking. More about that in a moment...
The subject matter is very, very, deadly serious. Easily the most important subject matter of this decade and certainly one of the top issues of the last 40 years. Regardless of whether you consider yourself in one political camp or another, or neutral; you should know that the documentary looks at both individual, very personal concerns such as a mother who lost her son in the war, and also examines much broader, political and economic aspects and questions that deserve attention, and intelligent, calm discussion.
**** Even if you have seen the film and disagree, you should WATCH THE DVD SUPPLEMENTAL footage. If you miss these additional parts, you are missing 50% of the information. Please see #2 below
And if you are critical of the main documentary's viewpoint, you may welcome the fact that the supplemental material is largely unedited, running footage devoid of any particular viewpoint from the film's authors.
This documentary well deserves the praise for being one of the first to approach this subject at a time when virtually the entire Western world media would not (or could not) go near this topic. When national fever is high and any questioning of the war effort is considered "treason," "unpatriotic," and "morally wrong;" our constitutional rights such as free speech and free assembly are in serious danger.
The documentary portrays this, but (unfortunately) only in a sidelight fashion (one of many problems). In fact, I'm not sure the filmmakers realized this was one of the greatest overriding issues. If common citizens were better informed, the insane actions and atrocities would have never happened.
Yet, the documentary displays this serious, national problem of the absentee press graphically and without any possible misinterpretation. Both within the US and in other parts of the world, censorship and denial is taking place. But it doesn't make the points strongly or clearly enough.
Because this film and its issues have been seen now by tens of millions, it is part of our culture and that effect is growing. To dismiss it without seeing it in its entirety (plus the supplemental materials!) is going to cast doubt on anyone who tries to discuss the documentary but doesn't know firsthand how the information is presented. Basically, you can't attack the documentary's ideas unless you watch the documentary. Hearing about it from your uncle or coworker will not be an acceptable working knowledge.
Furthermore, since these are gigantic political and life-threatening issues, every citizen has a duty to be as informed as possible. We can't have a country that goes to war, invades another 2 other countries, kills and permanently maims tens of thousands of its own soldiers and tens of thousands of citizens in the other countries, puts another 20,000+ in jail for six+ years, commits acts of torture by the thousands, and then has a substantial part of its own population refuse to consider this as right or wrong, and refuses to spend 2 hours of their time watching a easily available documentary that might shed new light or viewpoints on this situation.
That being said, Michael Moore's and his filmmaking team's documentary skills and decisions are sometimes good, but other times quite poor.
This documentary has several problems, and these have nothing to do with facts being correct or other content issues; this is strictly about the documentary filmmaking *process* and the decisions made in the creation of this work.
-- Big Problem #1:
If you have a film titled "Fahrenheit 9/11", don't start the film discussing presidential election questions and/or irregularities.
Any filmmaker knows that every minute, and every second, of their footage is precious, especially the first 10 minutes. A documentary on our nationwide election problems is just fine. But that's another documentary; maybe a really good one, but I don't think it should have been included, except perhaps at the end.
By starting off with material not directly related to the 9/11 attacks, Mr. Moore has given his critics ample fodder for criticism and rejection in the beginning, even if the reason for that rejection has flaws.
This decision was a huge presentation blunder, and stole precious resources that could have been used to set up and structure the rest of the material, and prepare the audience for what was ahead. In its final form, this information is irrelevant to the next 90 minutes and barely remembered after it's all over.
-- Big Problem #2:
As mentioned above, the filmmakers did not appear to have a good grasp of the subjects they were documenting, and there's no strong sense of what is important and what's not.
The results are missed opportunities, a barrage of information, and a lack of clarity. The information is not well organized, and it's not summarized or reviewed at times when a new viewer needs time to catch their breath. This is a problem with editing and pacing; and understanding how a viewer or audience will mentally keep track of everything.
That doesn't mean the material is incorrect or faulty, it means it's assembled and presented poorly. As a comparison, I'd say it was like reading a book by starting with the last chapter, then backing up one chapter at a time. Sure, you read the book and all the words, but the people, information, story, and connections are going to be a lot harder to put together with that kind of approach.
We see a lot of really important information. There's no doubt about that.
But what are the most important points? You might name 3, but someone else might name 3 completely different ones. And both would be right! However, this shouldn't happen if the documentary is well made.
-- Big Problem #3:
The film doesn't possess a good structure.
It's not a particularly linear piece, neither does it follow several simultaneous information or storylines. It doesn't have a "scientific" approach or any other good format. Instead it's an assembly line of data but fails to add up to a finished product, and following this analogy, some information falls off the assembly line and is easily forgotten. Again, this doesn't mean the data is wrong, this is a mistake of filmmaking; and in all fairness, it's the sort of mistake one would expect from someone not well skilled at creating documentaries. It's not amateur, but it's not tight and coherent either.
The material is both dense emotionally explosive, and hard to digest, especially if you aren't familiar with all the facts. But the presentation doesn't work to help the viewer through this, and connect the many pieces of information or give time for pause and review. Instead, the presentation is relentless and has a zigzag structure which takes away from the power of the material rather than combine it to something stronger.
For instance, we see critically important censorship and denial on the part of the media, but it's not brought into sharp mental focus amongst all the other information and data, and neither are the implications of this media black hole. This needed stronger, more focused presentation. The great crime that a war for "freedom" has denied "freedom of the press" is very likely lost to many viewers.
Add to this a seemingly never-ending series of musical jokes and segments, which I can't even guess at their purpose. Here we are watching this [literally] deadly serious material, and suddenly we have silly rock music and images, like some low-grade music video. This type of decision is truly amateur and pathetic; and just as shameful as the people being being joked about. If the documentary filmmakers don't treat the subject with seriousness, how can they ridicule other people?
But this documentary shouldn't have jokes. In fact, no "true documentary" would ever take this lunatic approach, and this behavior easily opens up the entire subject to ridicule. It's incomprehensible how any documentary would be created with this type of approach. Shame on the producers, distributors, and anyone else involved with the production for not stepping forward and "telling the emperor he has no clothes." This juvenile, dimwit approach disgraces the production and insults everyone who has suffered from the craziness of "Fahrenheit 9/11". This should never have happened.
-- Big Problem #4: Every moment of the film should be about runaway crazy "Fahrenheit 9/11," but it isn't.
As an example, President Bush bangs the podium and exclaims the usual nonsense about terrorists hating freedom and hating American goodwill. So why not show the real reasons? Like the fact that the United States sold arms to Iran and Iraq as they fought each other years ago, creating immense hostility throughout the Middle East towards the US? A little information, to either remind or inform the viewer of the real reasons for the hatred goes a long way to proving how we received an endless stream of lies and misleading information about the entire situation.
Better yet, since you are doing a documentary, why not ask a variety of experts on the subject, and have them explain and agree or disagree with "terrorists hate America and freedom".
Instead, precious moments in the documentary are stolen with largely dead or irrelevant material, such as when Michael Moore stands outside the Saudi Embassy with Secret Service coming to ask questions. It's interesting, but belongs in the supplemental materials section. That is not something that qualifies as national hysteria or "Fahrenheit 9/11". And it opens both Michael Moore and his entire team to criticisms of grandstanding and trying to be performers and part of the story instead of good documentary filmmakers.
Here's one of the most important things you should know:
In the original film documentary, we see a US military raid on a civilian home suspected to harbor terrorists
To my utter dismay, we see in the supplemental materials this is part of a much larger story with 10 times as much impact, with disgusting, barbaric and outrageous disrespect for ordinary citizens by our soldiers. Unfortunately this is lost and jumbled in the original cut.
The Swedish reporter with the US military unit tells us that no one, including Swedish media, would present this shocking and horrifying behavior. Furthermore, only the supplemental material lets us have an idea of the type of documentary footage Michael Moore and his team had to work with. In this well-documented sequence from the Swedish journalists, we see one of our military units invade an ordinary family's home and our soldiers physically and mentally abusing and terrorizing ordinary citizens, including tormenting a crippled old man. Apparently they didn't understand its importance.
THEN! ... we find out that one of the soldiers was drunk, and soldiers hit the old man's penis repeatedly, and this all happens with the commanding officer watching calmly to the side. Why on earth wasn't this included in the main documentary? This isn't as bad as Abu Ghraib torture sessions, but it's dynamite material nevertheless.
And then we are told this is not anything unusual; in fact it's commonplace!
Showing our military behaving like this is extremely important footage, and shows why people in Iraq and the Middle Eastern world have learned to hate the United States more and more each year. Yet, this crucial segment is poorly presented and largely lost in the original documentary.
Compared to some of the segments mentioned above, this is clearly more important. But, it was cast aside. I cannot understand this.
It's hard to speculate, but if this was left out, we have to ask ourselves what other material has been discarded? This is, unfortunately, just plain bad decision-making in the documentary process, a real lack of comprehension about on the part of the documentary filmmakers; and poor workmanship compared to other documentary work.
-- Final thoughts:
At this point you may think my opinion of the documentary is poor and maybe not worth viewing, so let me avoid the film's mistake and summarize this:
This is an exceedingly serious and important documentary, and I recommend it along with the supplemental materials to anyone who considers himself a good American, of moral conscience, or anyone who has interest in American politics and actions.
You don't have to agree but you should be familiar with the material and see all of it.
That's why it gets 5 stars. You need to watch this.
However, I'm very critical of the documentary skill, or lack thereof, and a much better and threfore less controversial documentary could have been created from the same materials, and might have had a more positive impact and received wider acceptance.
Even so, this needs to be seen.
And if you are confused how I can give five stars to something with this many problems, let me repeat that just delving into this subject in the national, political environment of the time of its release was breakthrough and revolutionary. It would have been "great" in the hands of others.
Summary of Fahrenheit 9/11
In the most provocative film of the year, Academy Award-winner Michael Moore presents a searing examination of the role played by greed and oil in the wake of the tragic events of 9/11. From Academy-Award winning director Michael Moore (Bowling for Columbine). WINNER, Palme D?Or Award at the Cannes Film Festival, BEST PICTURE. DVD features: * "The Release of Fahrenheit 9/11" featurette
* "Iraq, Pre-War" featurette: The people of Iraq on the eve of invasion
* "Homeland security, Miami style" featurette: Footage of the old men who patrol the Florida coast lookng for terrorists as part of the homeland security plan
* "Outside Abu Ghraib Prison"
* Eyewitness account from Samara, Iraq
* "Lila, D.C.": Lila Lipscomb at the Washington, D.C. premiere
* Arab-American comedians: Their acts and experiences after 9/11
* Extended interview: More with Abdul Henderson
* "Condi 9/11": Condoleezza Rice's 9/11 Commission testimony
* "Bush Rose Garden": George W. Bush's full press briefing after 9/11 Commission appearance
To anyone who truly understands what it means to be an American, Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 should be seen as a triumph of patriotic freedom. Rarely has the First Amendment been exercised with such fervor and forthrightness of purpose: After subjecting himself to charges of factual errors in his gun-lobby exposé Bowling for Columbine, Moore armed himself with a platoon of reputable fact-checkers, an abundance of indisputable film and video footage, and his own ironically comedic sense of righteous indignation, with the singular intention of toppling the war-ravaged administration of President George W. Bush. It's the Bush presidency that Moore, with his provocative array of facts and figures, blames for corporate corruption, senseless death, unnecessary war, and political favoritism toward Osama Bin Laden's family and Saudi oil partners following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Moore's incendiary film earned Palme d'Or honors at Cannes and a predictable legion of detractors, but do yourself a favor: Ignore those who condemn the film without seeing it, and let the facts speak for themselves. By honoring American soldiers and the victims of 9/11 while condemning Bush's rationale for war in Iraq, Fahrenheit 9/11 may actually succeed in turning the tides of history. --Jeff Shannon
Similar DVD Movies
Food, Inc.MHE; Release date: 2009-11-03; DVD
Best price: $7.98
Price in other shops:
An Inconvenient TruthPARAMOUNT HOME VIDEO; Release date: 2006-11-21; DVD
Best price: $4.99
Price in other shops:
The Awful Truth - The Complete DVD Set (Seasons 1 & 2)New Video; Release date: 2003-04-29; DVD
Best price: $14.19
Price in other shops:
The Big OneBuena Vista Home Video; Release date: 2004-09-28; DVD
Best price: $4.73
Price in other shops:
Roger & MeWarner Brothers; Release date: 2003-08-19; DVD
Best price: $12.99
Price in other shops:
Michael Moore Limited Edition DVD Collector's Set (Bowling for Columbine / The Big One)Moore; Release date: 2004-10-05; DVD
Best price: $6.95
Price in other shops:
Inside JobSON; Release date: 2011-03-08; DVD
Best price: $14.37
Price in other shops:
Bowling for ColumbineMGM; Release date: 2003-08-19; DVD
Best price: $3.97
Price in other shops:
Michael Moore - Capitalism: A Love StoryFox; Release date: 2010-03-09; DVD
Best price: $3.48
Price in other shops:
Sicko (Special Edition)Genius; Release date: 2007-11-06; DVD
Best price: $3.50
Price in other shops: