another maniacal Armond White review, this time "Fahrenheit 9/11"

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (2691 of them)
And that's Michael Moore's fault, how?

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:36 (nineteen years ago) link

Right I understand that, but I think he's overstating the film's influence on the regime of Saddam Hussein.

Gear! (Gear!), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:38 (nineteen years ago) link

And that's Michael Moore's fault, how?

You may have to ask someone who thinks that it is his fault.

deanomgwtf!!!p%3Fmsgid%3D4581997 (deangulberry), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:40 (nineteen years ago) link

Al-Jazeera bashing = automatic idiotic review.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:41 (nineteen years ago) link

Momus I think when a documentarist is reporting on a subject he should leave his bias or his favor at home. I guess we could debate whether the 'documentary' as a medium is inherently supposed to be objective or subjective, but the best ones I've seen ('One Day in September' comes to mind) leave polarizing issues like politics out of the story.

The Devil's Triad (calstars), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:42 (nineteen years ago) link

how could this movie leave politics out of the story?!!

s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:42 (nineteen years ago) link

"if only 'spellbound' stayed away from polarizing issues like spelling"

s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:43 (nineteen years ago) link

You are delusional. No movie can possibly be objective (and One Day in September certainly wasn't.) I'd rather have someone be upfront with his biases than pretend they don't exist.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:44 (nineteen years ago) link

"why did marcel ophuls have to keep bringing up the nazis in 'the sorrow and the pity'?"

s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:44 (nineteen years ago) link

for another, perhaps more informed point of view:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/

lovebug starski, Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:44 (nineteen years ago) link

"Why didn't we see more of the witch's POV in The Blair Witch Project?"

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:45 (nineteen years ago) link

The Fog of War had to talk about war, that was what killed it for me

Gear! (Gear!), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:45 (nineteen years ago) link

MAYBE WE SHOULD LET THE GOVERNMENT MAKE ALL OF THE DOCUMENTARIES

deanomgwtf!!!p%3Fmsgid%3D4581997 (deangulberry), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:45 (nineteen years ago) link

hahahaha alex

s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:46 (nineteen years ago) link

I don't consider Hitchen's particularly sane or well-informed.

Alex in SF (Alex in SF), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:47 (nineteen years ago) link

but he did say it was "unfairenheit"!

s1ocki (slutsky), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:48 (nineteen years ago) link

Has anyone pinpointed the year that Hitchens went off the reservation? Was there ever a time he didn't hate Clinton with a fiery passion?

miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:49 (nineteen years ago) link

Momus I think when a documentarist is reporting on a subject he should leave his bias or his favor at home. I guess we could debate whether the 'documentary' as a medium is inherently supposed to be objective or subjective, but the best ones I've seen ('One Day in September' comes to mind) leave polarizing issues like politics out of the story.

oh no, please don't me bring poor Nanook back into another thread. He's tired.

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:49 (nineteen years ago) link

You must always remember that people can make movies about whatever they want. And that they can express any point of view that they want. Except in countries where they can't. Well, they CAN in countries where they can't, but they might end up in jail.

Yours truly, Mister Obvious

Mr.Obvious (scott seward), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:51 (nineteen years ago) link

Alex in SF I am obviously remembering a different film. I thought 'One Day' at least attempted to be more objective than Moore's work, no?

The Devil's Triad (calstars), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:51 (nineteen years ago) link

But Nanook doesn't really bring anything to the argument. "Nanook staged things and played with the facts" isn't a defense (of Moore's tactics, in these cases) unless there is consensus about Nanook's stature as a documentary, which there isn't.

miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:53 (nineteen years ago) link

I don't think a documentary has any particular responsibility to be objective; it isn't a news report.

VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:53 (nineteen years ago) link

"The pitfall for Moore is not subjectivity, but accuracy." to thread

miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:55 (nineteen years ago) link

Nanook brings a history of ahistory, much as milo and amateur!st would like to deny it (?).

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:55 (nineteen years ago) link

where has Moore's accuracy been called into account, milo? Hitchens doesn't count, he's batshit. And the same people harping on Moore's perceived accuracy problem (you, amateur!st) are the same ones harping on Moore's hiring of fact-checkers. You can't have it both ways, unless of course you can.

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 18:56 (nineteen years ago) link

What does Nanook bring? Why does it matter that Flaherty fudged things, unless it's agreed upon that Nanook is a documentary, is accepted by documentarians/filmmakers/critics and that a film need only live up to its standards?

If everyone agreed that Nanook was a documentary, pure and simple, then you're right. You could argue that people shouldn't/can't hold Moore to a different standard. But that view of Nanook isn't universal or even a majority.

hstencil, that was in reference to the "it needs to be objective" arguments. "Objectivity" is a lame bogeyman raised by the right to attack Moore, when objectivity is neither necessary nor preferable (documentary without a POV = boring/pointless).

miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 19:00 (nineteen years ago) link

I'm with Momus (!): I don't ever want to see an "objective" documentary - who could possibly care? Human beings have thoughts, feelings and opinions and so does the art they make non-shockah!

J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 19:04 (nineteen years ago) link

(NB documentaries are my very favorite types of films, precisely because of all the art forms I feel they come closest to briging the artist/audience gap & it's remarkable when that happens)

J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 19:05 (nineteen years ago) link

encyclopedia def.:

Reference Library: Encyclopedia

Main Page | See live article | Alphabetical index

Documentary film
An incredibly broad category of cinematic expression, traditionally, the only common characteristic to all documentary films is that they are meant to be non-fiction films. The French used the term to refer to any non-fiction film, including travelogues and instructional videos. The earliest "moving pictures" were by definition documentary. They were single shots, moments captured on film, whether of a train entering a station, a boat docking, or a factory of people getting off work. Early film (pre-1900) was dominated by the novelty of showing an event. These short films were called "actualities." Very little storytelling took place before the turn of the century, due mostly to technological limitations: cameras could hold only very small amounts of film; many of the first films are a minute or less in length.
With Robert J. Flaherty's Nanook of the North in 1922, documentary film embraced romanticism; Flaherty went on to film a number of heavily staged romantic films, usually showing how his subjects would have lived 100 years earlier and not how they lived right then (for instance, in Nanook of the North Flaherty does not allow his subjects to shoot a walrus with a nearby shotgun, but has them use a harpoon instead, putting themselves in considerable danger).

Some of Flaherty's staging, such as building a roofless igloo for interior shots, was done to accommodate the filming technology of the time. In later years, attempts to steer the action in this way, without informing the audience, have come to be considered both unethical and contradictory to the nature of documentary film. On the other hand, both the story line and content of any documentary are imposed by the filmmaker.

Amazon.com description:

Editorial Reviews
Amazon.com essential video
Robert J. Flaherty, who wrote, directed, produced, shot, and edited this landmark picture, will forever be remembered as the godfather of documentary filmmaking. While this landmark 1922 production, shot on the northeastern shore of Hudson Bay, isn't a true documentary by contemporary conventions, it remains the first great nonfiction film. With the help of Nanook and his friends and family, Flaherty undertook the mission of re-creating an Eskimo culture that no longer existed in a series of staged scenes. Nanook ice fishes, harpoons a walrus, catches a seal, traps, builds an igloo, and trades pelts at a trading post, all captured by Flaherty's inquisitive camera. Though he presents a "happy" culture bordering on primitive innocence (Nanook and his family were in reality quite westernized), his loving portrait is anything but condescending. Ultimately Flaherty shares his tremendous respect and awe for a culture that has learned to not just survive but thrive in such an inhospitable environment. On a purely visual level the film is a beautiful work of cinema, an understated drama in an austere, unblemished landscape of snow and ice. With unerring simplicity and directness, Flaherty re-creates the details and rhythms of a culture long gone and gives the world a glimpse.

review from Silent Film Sources:

Nanook of the North (1922)
R E V I E W 1922. 6 reels.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Revillon Freres present NANOOK OF THE NORTH. A story of life and love in the actual arctic. Produced by Robert J. Flaherty F.R.G.S. Pathepicture.
Opening title: The mysterious Barren Lands- desolate, boulder-strewn, wind-swept- illimitable spaces which top the world.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Produced for video by David Shepard. Nanook of the North was the first of Robert J. Flaherty's romantic depictions of man's dignified perseverance in combating a malevolent nature. Flaherty is often called "the father of the documentary", and he did make the first theatrical documentary feature with Nanook. But that fact does not do justice to the humanism and the technical brilliance that makes his best works -- Nanook, Man of Aran and Louisiana Story -- beautiful and enduring.

imdb:

Nanook of the North (1922)
Directed by
Robert J. Flaherty

Writing credits
Robert J. Flaherty

Genre: Documentary (more)

Tagline: A story of life and love in the actual Arctic. (more)

Plot Summary: Documents one year in the life of Nanook, an Eskimo (Inuit) and his family. Describes the trading, hunting... (more)

Shall I go on? Googling gets old.

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 19:06 (nineteen years ago) link

"Objectivity" is a lame bogeyman raised by the right to attack Moore, when objectivity is neither necessary nor preferable (documentary without a POV = boring/pointless).
Boring? 'Baseball?'
And perish the thought of objectivity (although it is very slippery) in our accounts of history. Sorry but I don't get it, how is subjectivity in this case preferable?

The Devil's Triad (calstars), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 19:06 (nineteen years ago) link

I find Moore's wavering on what he and his films are to be frustrating though. He certainly didn't refuse his Oscar on the grounds that he's a comedian. He's willing to use the documentary moniker to aid his cause, to give his films the air of legitimacy (factual or otherwise) that comes with it. But when challenged on facts or methodology, he resorts to the cheap "I'm an entertainer," "it's a joke" stuff.

x-post

An IMDB entry for it says documentary - OK, IMDB also lists Häxan as a doc. Is Häxan a documentary? An Amazon review, a dictionary reference that includes the line "In later years, attempts to steer the action in this way, without informing the audience, have come to be considered both unethical and contradictory to the nature of documentary film."

None of these show a consensus of opinion on Nanook that lets you use it and its methods as a standard. (Because that consensus does not exist.)

miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 19:10 (nineteen years ago) link

There is no objectivity (aside from, say, the dates events happened) in our history. Subjectivity is inherent to any human-authored medium. But without a POV, an idea guiding the documentary, what do you have? At best, a PBS/History Channel half-hour talking head show. At worst, ten o'clock news footage.

I think your error is in assuming that a documentary is about accounting history. Documentary != history book.

miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 19:14 (nineteen years ago) link

History Book != objective

deanomgwtf!!!p%3Fmsgid%3D4581997 (deangulberry), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 19:17 (nineteen years ago) link

Most PBS docs I've seen aren't objective either. Frontline sure ain't.

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 19:26 (nineteen years ago) link

I think your error is in assuming that a documentary is about accounting history
Isn't this what Moore is trying to do in his film?

The Devil's Triad (calstars), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 19:26 (nineteen years ago) link

is he accounting history or trying to affect history? And does it matter which one he's doing (if he's doing either)?

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 19:27 (nineteen years ago) link

I just watched the somewhat mediocre "And Starring Pancho Villa as Himself" last night... not a great film, but an interesting idea as the DW Griffith's film team forced Villa to make battle decisions that would suit their cinematic requirements (aka attacking only in the daylight, not into the sun, etc.).

I'm reminded of how effective this whole embedded journalist thing worked during the war's early stages... lame ass FOX reporters felt the espirit de corps and wouldn't report anything negative... they became buddies with the soldiers.

(And my point is....?)

andy, Tuesday, 22 June 2004 19:30 (nineteen years ago) link

so presumably saddam hussein didn't torture anyone before 1997, when resevoir dogs gave him some pointers?? i wonder how white would explain serbian atrocities and the tutsi/hutu massacres.

lauren (laurenp), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 19:40 (nineteen years ago) link

good point. tho I think RD was before '97, right? I remember seeing it in high school.

hstencil (hstencil), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 19:55 (nineteen years ago) link

yeah, duh. i have no idea why i said 1997!

lauren (laurenp), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 19:57 (nineteen years ago) link

All documentation of necessity editorializes. To document is to editorialize. This extends even to saying "today is Tuesday, the 22nd of June" - how many conventions & preferences are expressed when I say that? several, if not dozens. "Objectivity" is a phantom usually conjured by the right when they want to complain that something doesn't lean in their direction. I'd hope that lefties (since I'm nominally one of them) would know better than to not fear this bogeyman. All documentation of anything ever is editorial.

J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 20:04 (nineteen years ago) link

"know better than to fear," I mean

J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 20:10 (nineteen years ago) link

"The only objective opinion is MINE."

VengaDan Perry (Dan Perry), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 20:18 (nineteen years ago) link

I thought the Hitchens column was sort of entertaining, anyway, in that Hitchens-playing-his-same-old-hand kind of way.

morris pavilion (samjeff), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 20:24 (nineteen years ago) link

heh, armond white otm re: moore but not so re: anything else. "merde," wtf? also, it's "punditariat," duh!

i am really dreading seeing this movie.

g--ff (gcannon), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 21:55 (nineteen years ago) link

Dan given that You are the Pope Your statement actually does kinda pertain in Your case, Yer Eminence

J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Tuesday, 22 June 2004 21:57 (nineteen years ago) link

'Let us not forget that Dana Carvey did more than anyone in America, save Ross Perot, to drive Bush père from the White House.'

J. Hoberman

a) does he mean Garth out of Wayne's World?
b) if so, what's he on about?
c) and you know what the worst part is? I never learned to read.

Enrique (Enrique), Thursday, 24 June 2004 13:56 (nineteen years ago) link

see other thread, re: GHWB impersonation and "1000 points of light."

hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 24 June 2004 14:56 (nineteen years ago) link

from White's review - ""This is a crime," he says. "It must be avenged!" Noujaim accepts his threat as understandable rage, rather than demand journalistic integrity. No American reviews noticed this."

No other reviews "noticed this" because he left off the last part of the reporter's statement - "it must be avenged, or at least punished." (something to that effect)

miloauckerman (miloauckerman), Friday, 25 June 2004 15:30 (nineteen years ago) link

three years pass...

No Country for Old Men > better than There Will Be Blood, Zodiac

The Coen brothers hauntingly mythologize Americana, while P.T. Anderson and David Fincher make it morbid, sadistic and self-congratulatory.

and what, Thursday, 17 January 2008 19:43 (sixteen years ago) link

Unfollowed him on Twitter, finally

50 Best Fellas (Eric H.), Thursday, 28 September 2023 02:47 (six months ago) link

two weeks pass...

The teens in TikTok clips who pitifully bounce and sing along with the film’s pre-recorded concert are the flip side of those nerds and sociopaths who lined up for The Dark Knight Rises ...

OK, sure.

... in Aurora, Colo.

oh.

Dwigt Rortugal (Eric H.), Wednesday, 18 October 2023 14:53 (six months ago) link

dude is deeply unwell, just an actually mentally ill man ineptly weaponized by the right wing

omar little, Wednesday, 18 October 2023 19:03 (six months ago) link

two months pass...

Sharing his "better than" list ONLY because it's now become the most sane thing he does any given year, frankly. (Or closest to sane, anyway.)

John Wick 4 > Oppenheimer

Chad Stahelski climaxed the Keanu Reeves cult franchise with the year’s most visually, kinetically thrilling filmcraft. Movement is the perfect antidote to Christopher Nolan’s no-fun talkathon. Stahelski’s execution of dazzling choreographed combat extended silent-era and movie-musical slapstick — confronting mankind’s capacity for self-defense killing as a sublime moral act. He made antipathetic video-game artifice feel cathartic, unlike a nihilistic pseudo-history. Nolan, as ever, twists national defense into wearying social complexity. Hail the action genre gone nuclear, not pompous.

Rebel Moon > Killers of the Flower Moon

Zack Snyder, Stahelski’s only rival, knows what Godard knew: Myth is how we learn who we are. So Snyder remakes the childish Star Wars series into rousing adult moral lessons, whereas Martin Scorsese succumbs to America’s current self-loathing in his first political film (and first Western)— a bland epic superficially preoccupied with white supremacy. It shows Scorsese learned nothing from John Ford.

All of Us Strangers > Saltburn

Andrew Haigh’s pop-melodrama finds family-based emotion in the erotic awakening of lonely Brit Andrew Scott. Emerald Fennell’s phony analysis of England’s class system attacks the family unit through feminist/sexual transgression. A triumph commemorating Pet Shop Boys sophistication vs. a disaster that perverts a great Pet Shop Boys song.

The Taste of Things > Maestro

Tran Anh Hung’s exquisite re-creation of French culinary dedication practiced by Juliette Binoche and Benoît Magimel. It embarrasses the disingenuous dishonesty of Bradley Cooper’s autograph-hound pseudo-biography that toasts Leonard Bernstein’s political, sexual dissembling as modern virtue.

Winter Boy > May December

Christophe Honoré dares candid semi-autobiography in a coming-of-age story about Paul Kircher’s coming-of–personal responsibility. It bests another dishonest Todd Haynes academic thesis, this time indulging pedophilia as social defiance and artistic audacity.

Asteroid City > Past Lives

Wes Anderson’s sunny, stylized nostalgic adolescent outing recalls America’s natural diversity in the ’50s, back when we believed in social, scientific, and artistic potential. Celine Song’s sad-sack narcissism prefers a tribal, Buddhist excuse for immaturity and social disconnection.

Will-o’-the-Wisp > Barbie

João Pedro Rodrigues interrogates Western art, sex, and politics when Portuguese heir Mauro Costa protests his heritage by becoming a dancing firefighter. This is genuine cultural radicalism, surreal and funny. Unlike Greta Gerwig’s toy-feminism, a marketing coup that sold misandry and ineptitude alongside vapid white privilege — all the more biased in its supporting cast of diversity tokens.

Everything Went Fine > Passages

François Ozon’s broken-family drama in which Sophie Marceau accepts the weirdness of her father André Dussollier as like her own. But Ira Sachs equates queerness with generational selfishness. Healing vs. rupture.

Nobody’s Hero > American Fiction

Alain Guiraudie teases French liberalism when middle-class Jean-Charles Clichet harbors a Muslim terrorist and then falls in love with middle-aged hooker Noémie Lvovksy. Hypocrisy becomes farce whereas Cord Jefferson practices the same racial hypocrisy as the black pathology trend of American lit that he pretends to satirize. Deep vs. shallow.

Full River Red > Origin and Rustin

Zhang Yimou’s visually stunning ode to China’s warrior history is a movie to marvel at and heed. Ava DuVernay extolling Aunjanue Ellis-Taylor’s intellectual research into the global “root causes” of American racism is off-the-charts ludicrous. So is George Wolfe’s inadvertent civil-rights-era comedy Rustin. Strong, artful patriotism vs. Hollywood weakness.

Full Time > The Holdovers

Eric Gravel’s empathy with Laure Calamy’s stressed young mother seeking pride and self-sufficiency teaches something real and non-cliché about working-class identity to indie-movie smarty-pants Alexander Payne.

The Crime Is Mine > Poor Things

François Ozon’s delirious feminist farce captures the inanity of the #MeToo movement. His cinematic and theatrical artifice goes back through the history of sexual duplicity, while art fraud Yorgos Lanthimos defends feminist hypocrisy in his odious sexual horror comedy.

Thanksgiving > Oppenheimer, Killers of the Flower Moon, Barbie

Eli Roth has made the first movie to evoke J6, not shying away from how national chaos was distorted and misunderstood by mainstream corporate media. Brash, hilarious Roth satirizes American self-destruction, leaving Nolan, Scorsese, and Gerwig with moral and ideological blood on their hands.

stephen miller is not your friend (Eric H.), Friday, 5 January 2024 16:28 (three months ago) link

I agree more than I disagree!

poppers fueled buttsex crescendo (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 5 January 2024 16:29 (three months ago) link

All of Us Strangers > Saltburn

I'd say this is not a contrarian take but my Twitter and Letterboxd feeds disagree.

stephen miller is not your friend (Eric H.), Friday, 5 January 2024 16:33 (three months ago) link

Certainly Nobody's Hero, Everything Went Fine, and Will-o’-the-Wisp deserve more mentions.

Wonder how the NRO crowd will dig the oral sex sequence in Will-o’-the-Wisp.

poppers fueled buttsex crescendo (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 5 January 2024 16:38 (three months ago) link

Almost fitting that they'll chase it down with the decapitations of Thanksgiving, really

Wack Snyder (Eric H.), Friday, 5 January 2024 16:39 (three months ago) link

Eli Roth has made the first movie to evoke J6, not shying away from how national chaos was distorted and misunderstood by mainstream corporate media.

if I hold up this sentence in front of a mirror will it make more sense or

poppers fueled buttsex crescendo (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 5 January 2024 16:41 (three months ago) link

the closer you were to get to understanding that, the more I'd worry about you

ɥɯ ︵ (°□°) (mh), Friday, 5 January 2024 22:16 (three months ago) link

Pairing Asteroid City with Past Lives is so ridiculous, it's intriguing. It's also ridiculous.

clemenza, Friday, 5 January 2024 22:46 (three months ago) link

(I won't even get into his valuation of their relative worth.)

clemenza, Friday, 5 January 2024 22:58 (three months ago) link

A little disappointed he didn't have Sound of Freedom > Zone of Interest or Chicken Run II or something...

an icon of a worried-looking, long-haired, bespectacled man (C. Grisso/McCain), Saturday, 6 January 2024 00:15 (three months ago) link

Super Mario Bros. > Occupied City

underwater as a compliment (Eazy), Saturday, 6 January 2024 08:20 (three months ago) link

Lady Ballers > Orlando, My Political Biography

Wack Snyder (Eric H.), Saturday, 6 January 2024 15:15 (three months ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.