For some strange reason, this film seems to be getting a lot of attention on this website. Has anyone here actually seen the film?

Frank:

Aside from a handful of midnight screenings here and there, the film doesn’t open in wide release until tomorrow. So my guess is that most of the authors on this blog haven’t seen it yet.

I think much of the attention to the film has a lot to do with the fact that Conservatives are genuinely afraid of what it may accomplish. Not so much in terms of "swaying" votes, but in terms of energizing liberals this election year. An article I read today basically suggests that Fahrenheit 911 will be widely seen by Liberals and widely ignored by Conservatives. There is probably a small contingent of "on the fence" people who will see it and have their opinion swayed one way or another, but it won’t be much. (Frankly, anyone whose political ideology shifts based on seeing a 90-minute documentary probably isn’t considered a very valuable vote anyway. If they are so easily swayed, they could change their opinion another dozen or so times between now and November.)

I don’t think that Moore himself has major aspirations of "converting" Conservatives to Liberals. He described it as "an op-ed piece" and went on to say that, "It’s my opinion about the last four years of the Bush administration... I’m not trying to pretend that this is some sort of fair and balanced work of journalism." Some Conservatives will (and have) argue that using a the film to express your political beliefs is inappropriate. Of course, Andrew Sarris argues in his book "Politics in Cinema" that there has never been a film made that was not inherently political in nature.

Like I said, I think the idea is about energizing the Democratic base. And I think that it will be successful in that goal.

PS: To echo your inquiry, I’ll be curious to know how many of the NLT authors plan to see it.

This far-left horror show will not help the Democrats in this election. How much it hurts them is up to us.

Starbuck -Thanks for the update. Now I’m curious about this film and will probably watch it since it seems to have hit a few neocon nerves.
David Frisk: how long have you been suffering from delusions of adequacy?

Frank and Starbuck: you guys are liberals, should this movie be regulated by the BCRA? It is express advocacy against a specific candidate. Moore did spend more than the limit on it. Seems like it should be!

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think it should be. I think Campaign Finance is a travesty. But it seems that liberals and moderates (and any conservatives) that supported it should be clamoring to get Moore’s movie regulated.

Correction Rob, the advertisements for the movie (on television and radio).

Luke, are you sure thats all the BCRA covers? One cannot spend more than a certain limit in favor of one candidate even if it is printing flyers and distributing them. I think the limit might be 2000 dollars. So if they say that this movie is express advocacy against Bush, and Moore defiantely spend more than 2000....

I am by no means an expert on the text of the actual "law" however.

Mr. Gordon, if you want to bring Michael Moore-style manners to an internet thread, why don’t you find a more appropriate site? You certainly don’t come across as witty, or as contributing to any meaningful discussion. If you think the most important thing about Moore’s film is that it gets on neocons’ nerves, you are a sad case indeed.

Your intellectual family is ACT, Move On, Code Pink, the DNC, the ACLU, the NAACP, and the rest of the Democratic scum bucket. Stay off our site if you insist on engaging in unprovoked attacks against other posters.