Bush. Bin Laden. 9/11. Iraq. Micheal Moore. Let the controversy begin.

Micheal Moore hates George W. Bush. There, I said it. Now that any sense of impartiality on Moore's behalf is out of the way, I'd like to discuss Moore's latest film, "Farenheit 9/11". Simply put, while the film does have a decidedly anti-Bush slant to it (actually, that's quite an understatement), do not think for one second that he let's the Democrats off any easier. In fact, by the time the film ends, something quite subtle and yet distinct manages to rise through the documentary itself - the point of the film is not just a hatred and burning desire against W, but is actually an indictment against unchecked government itself. That fact alone makes the film well worth the viewing.

The film opens with a sort of "dream" scenario, in which Al Gore won the 2000 election and all is right in the world. It doesn't take long though, for Moore to launch in against the actual outcome of said election, still furthering that now flat liberal joke, that Bush stole the election. In fact, before the title card hits the screen, Moore has already hammered home a number of points against Bush - his knowledge (or lack thereof) about the attacks before hand, his work ethic and his connections, all of which play large roles in the film itself. Though the film runs almost two hours, there is barely a segment that goes by that isn't playing into a larger one of Moore's main points - that is to say, his personal view and opinion against George W. Bush.

There will inevitably be an outcry against this film as being "documentary" material, since it takes such a slant. But as Roger Ebert put it, the best documentaries do take a side, do show an angle and do take a side. Moore's previous film "Bowling for Columbine" was attacked for having an angle and a side, which is odd because it is only in film that we seem to care about an argument being one sided. The best essays, novels, plays and even albums often try to prove a point, no matter what side of the spectrum one is on. Why should film be held to a different standard?

That's not to say that Moore's arguments are entirely solid. Anyone who reads this site, or has followed world politics over the past few years will probably not be surprised and shocked by the topics discussed in the film - the USA PATRIOT ACT, the connection between Bush and the bin Laden family, etc. But because film is for a mass audience, there is no way of knowing...well, who knows what. Therefore, while the fact that John Ashcroft lost to a dead man in his run for the Senate is old news to someone like me, the person sitting next to you in the theater may have never heard it. The way information is disseminated (or not) in our society, allows Moore to play a little loose and fast with facts, something he has always been accused of. While I agreed and knew a lot of his topics, the way he glossed over some of them - such as the connection between George and Jeb before the election - reveals that the truth is actually a lot more complicated than Moore lets on. This will be one of the main crux's against the film I am sure, and it is really something that Moore can't actually deny.

That being said, how does the movie itself rate as a movie? Judging by the massive crowds lining the street waiting to see it here, I would say it rates pretty well and has a little something for everyone. Moore is, at his heart, a modern day prankster and comic (so to speak), so the film has a large amount of humor to it. It really is quite an odd feeling to sit in a theater with 400 other people and watch as they all laugh at the President and his cronies. I felt, more than once, like I was with a group of fellow travelers to be sure, but that some of the blows against Bush were a little unfair. The magic of editing can make anyone look bad, and Moore fast cuts many times through out, making it hard to really keep some things in context.

Humor aside, there are some very memorable moments in "Farenheit 9/11". One is the fact that Bush sat for 11 minutes after hearing the news about the attacks on the WTC before even moving, his eyes kind of glossed over and staring into space. Moore makes this situation seem a little bit more diabolic than it probably was, but it is unsettling to watch a man who is the leader of the free world sit and be completely dumbstruck about what to do. Another one of the more striking and disturbing images in the film is the way that Bush hammed it up for the camera and White House television staff before a scheduled, national speech. We get clips of this and his prep (fixing his hair, makeup, etc) early in the movie, but it is not till later that we see that the George Bush winking and smirking like a naughty school kid before going live to the nation is actually goofing around right before he announced the start of the war in Iraq. That alone is an image that will get to you, if only for the sheer ballsyness of it.

There are other things about the film that stick with you: the footage of Iraqis in hospitals after US attacks;the pure human emotion from an Iraqi woman as she struggles to express her grief and raw hatred at the US and the world over the death of her family...and then there is Lila Lipscomb. An employment counselor in Moore's hometown of Flint, MI, Lipscomb is a born and raised defender and protector of the US military. Moore uses her multiple times in the film as a segway to various points - about how the military recruits inner city kids heavily (two Marine recruiters are the focus, and one can't help but think that they are about as slimy as they come with their tactics. See the film to understand what I mean) and also to discuss her families involvement in the military itself. Her husband, brother, father, grandfather, uncles and friends all served in the military in some capacity, as did her daughter and son. But as we learn towards the end of the film, her son sadly did not make it out of Iraq. Each soldiers death is a serious tragedy, no matter what side you are on. But the way that Moore follows her after the fact - in an interview about how she received the news, to her trip to DC to vent at the White House (well, the outside of it) crosses any line of party affiliation. To see a woman lose her faith in the government that is established to protect her and her family and never use their own might for anything but a just cause, is a heartbreaking experience that can't really be summed up in words. Lipscomb's tale will stay with you.

Is the film a bit heavy handed sometimes? Probably. Is Moore over the top in his agenda? That's debatable but not without merit. Is "Farenheit 9/11" a movie that every American should see? Without a doubt. For as I said at the beginning of this review, Moore inadvertantly shows what happens when a government goes unchecked. When legislation passes in the middle of the night, not even read by most of the senators (Democrats included. Moore mocks Tom Daschle and Dick Gephardt for not having any sort of backbone response to the Republican offensive). When political influence from investors gets in the way of the safety and security of a nation. What happens when the poor pay for the sins of the rich. All important and heated topics that can (and probably will) be discussed here and around the country for weeks and months to come.

Like the film's promo commercials say - it's going to be a hot summer.