![]() |
the international federation of film critics | ||||||||||
| | | | | | | ||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
|
Cannes 2004A Real Punch in the Face
|
||||||||||
![]() |
The producer of the BBC radio programme for which I do daily round-ups calls and asks my opinion of the film. Upon my enthusiasm, she awkwardly apologises: I won't be doing my daily review today; they have an American critic saying that Fahrenheit 911 is "all rubbish". A few minutes later, another editor of another BBC radio programme calls: same story. British censorship is already in first gear! The day after, reviews reveal the uneasiness of certain critics. They all use the same reasons for saying that Fahrenheit 911 is a minor film: partial, biased, not the work of a journalist, too emotional, based on TV news footage, nasty, etc. In fact, a lot of supposedly left-wing critics don't know how to deal with Moore. He is too free for them, an uncontrollable agent who doesn't play by the book, who doesn't rely on Democrats anymore to do the job of informing the American people. Fahrenheit 911 is biased? Well, of course. This is no documentary but a pamphlet. Partisan? Well, of course, he never pretended to deliver an impartial investigation. Not the work of a journalist? Well, no, Moore has never been a journalist and never claimed he was. Fahrenheit 911 is too emotional? Well, yes, this is Moore's weapon of mass persuasion, along with a hilarious sense of humour, to reach his audience. His audience: not the 'sophisticated' anti-war European crowds, but the indoctrinated and ill-informed people from Milwaukee. The same people who may well elect George Bush for a second time and be responsible for a decision, which will affect us all. Fahrenheit 911 amply deserves its Palme d'Or. No need to say "it's a political choice", no need to diminish its cinematic merits. The film exists; it's here, vital for us, citizens of the world, a real punch in the face, the most needed film of the year. In other words, the best film.
| recent festivals |
Cannes 2004
|