19 June 2004

Ebert on 9/11

Although Roger Ebert gave a thumbs-up to Garfield and defended his decision on Ebert & Roeper by saying he's a fan of Family Circus and Cathy too, I still respect him because of this article about Fahrenheit 9/11.

The pitfall for Moore is not subjectivity, but accuracy. We expect him to hold an opinion and argue it, but we also require his facts to be correct. I was an admirer of his previous doc, the Oscar-winning "Bowling for Columbine," until I discovered that some of his "facts" were wrong, false or fudged.


Because I agree with Moore's politics, his inaccuracies pained me ... I cannot ignore flaws simply because I agree with the filmmaker. In hurting his cause, he wounds mine.

I don't want this to become a forum for fact-checking, but Christopher Hitchens has a lengthy dissection of Moore's film. I've only just skimmed it, so don't yet have an opinion. It, at the very least, equals Moore's arrogant aggression. I guess they're paired well. Moore keeps up with some of the complaints at his Web site.
[ posted by sstrader on 19 June 2004 at 11:06:14 AM in Cinema ]