Fahrenheit 9/11: Documentary or Propaganda?

Task: A

1. Write a brief introduction to the documentary film

Highest grossing documentary of all time, Fahrenheit 9/11 is a 2004 documentary style film, directed by political commentator and american filmmaker Michael Moore. The purpose of the controversial film is to take a close look at the presidency of George W. Bush, the War on Terror and it's coverage in the news media. The two hour documentary caused worldwide controversy and people how accurate it actually is. The film portrayed that American corporate media were just 'cheerleaders' when it came to the 2003 invasion of Iraq and they didn't actually provide accurate, real or objective analysis of the rationale for the war or the resulting casualties there. The documentary was originally debuted at the 2004 Cannes Film Festival and caused the longest standing ovation is the festivals history after receiving a 20 minute standing ovation. Showing that although the documentary did cause a lot of controversy and mixed opinions it also generated a lot of success, even winning a Palme d'Or award.


2. Who is Michael Moore and what other documentaries has he been associated with?

American filmmaker, social critic, author and political activist, Michael Moore is one of the most successful men in the business. He is the producer and director of 2004 sensation Fahrenheit which was awarded the highest-grossing documentary of all time, aswell as the winner of the Palme d'Or award (Cannes Film Festivals highest award). He also had great success with 2002 film Bowling for Columbine, which was based around the Columbine High School massacre in 1999 and what caused it, the background environment in which the harrowing event took place, other gun violence and the nature of violence in the United States. Another achievement from Michael Moore was the 2007 hit Sicko which focused on health care in the US, health insurance and also the pharmaceutical industry. This documentary accomplished the Academy Award for Documentary Feature aswell as appearing in the top ten highest-grossing documentaries after creating the film on a $9 million budget but grossed around $24.5 million.

Task B 

1. Watch the trailer for Fahrenheit 911 again and answer the following questions : www.farenheit911.com or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Zf2nCiBJLo

2. What is the opening statement? How does this suggest how much influence the government has?

The trailer of the documentary starts with a outrageous and shocking statement. Congressman Jim McDermott is quoted saying 'You can make people do anything if they're afraid'. This statement is hard hitting as it allows the audience to be directly told how it is and sets the tone of the 2 hour long film. This statement portrays the US government in a bad light, although its not obviously referring to the government but because of what the topic is about it makes it pretty obvious to the audience. This suggests that the government does and will always have the power in their hands, they make the decisions and the general public really have no say. This also suggests that the government are very influential, the only two groups who really are protected are the police and government which means they can pretty much do whatever they want whether they are even obeying the laws themselves. Automatically people will obey the rules set by the government and nobody rarely question that which with this statement shows they can control civilians and force them to do what they say as the powerful they have brings fear.

3. What information is given about the U.S. Government and the Bin Laden family in the opening segment. 

The trailer pretty much straight away starts with informing the audience about the U.S Government and Osama Bin Laden (aswell as his family). The documentary shows video footage, informative facts and documents all referring to the government and there relation to Osama Bin Laden. Firstly the trailer shows us how airplanes and airports have been affected after the 9/11 attacks and how they've been grounded due to this. But the controversy begins after the audience is shown through documents which clearly showed George W Bush' name that Bin Laden and his family all were catered with private airplanes around the time which is slightly odd as to why they'd be flown around in private planes as they are a known serious terrorist threat. Which hints that potentially 9/11 was a complete set up by the government and purposely done. Straight away the audience is aware that this documentary's role is to bring hidden theories to the public eye and to suggest the corruption behind it and whether theirs more to the 9/11 attacks then what the public is aware of. 

4. What is implied about President Bush in the opening segment (first 25 seconds)? Describe how the film implies this?

President Bush is not shown in the best light throughout this documentary and a lot of his hidden mistakes are brought to public attention. But one of the most shocking discoveries (discovered in the first 25 seconds) is that the president himself actually ordered for Osama Bin Laden and all his family to be flown through american on their own private plane despite every other American airplane being grounded. Which makes the viewers question Bush' attention and why this wasn't made public knowledge. This implies that the government are hiding important information from the public which is wrong and scary. Is Bush really trying to protect america or destroy it? is he keeping his friends (America) close and his enemy's (Osama Bin Laden) closer? or is he just really sided with the enemy?. All questions which the viewers could relate to after the implication of this film.

5. What impression is given about the war in Iraq? What evidence shows you who is driving this war and the reasons why? 

The evidence shown in the documentary is against the US Government and their involvement in the Iraq wars. The impression is that the US Government has far to much involvement and it makes some people suspicious as to whats the governments real attentions. The documentary achieves well at backing up statements with evidence which always makes something seem more reliable if evidence is shown as well as the point. Evidence is immediately shown against the US Government and business owners influence on the Iraq war. Multiple politicians come forward discussing situations which happened, one important statement was the value of Iraq oil and how important it is for America. Many soldiers are being forced to fight for them purely for money purposes which could be seen as ethically wrong. One person was quoted saying 'it's good for business, bad for people' which really means money is more important then lives. A horrifyingly real view on today's society but also another bad look on the US government; the only thing really there bothered about is money and business. What has the world come to when money and business is seen as higher importance then the well being and life of people.

6. What kind of music is chosen to back this opening segment of the trailer (until the words “bad for the people”)? And what does it communicate to you? How is this a contradiction to what is being said?

Music is used throughout the opening segment of the trailer which usually would add tension and build up. However the type of music played is contradictive and doesn't match the story which is being visually shown. The music is up beat and positive whereas on the screen conflict, terror and controversy is shown. This technique is used to cause slight confusion and make you think more about what's happening. Also in a way if the director used extremely dramatic music it would feel as if your being forced to agree with the conspiracy theories brought up in the documentary and look as if its trying to hard to be persuasive. However after a powerful quote is said 'bad for people' the music automatically switches to a more hard hitting sound which relates to the topics discussed. The music is similar to something from an action film which could symbolize this whole situation between the government and Bin Laden; its being played out like an action film whereas its not something from a Hollywood blockbuster its real life. The music does contradict the footage shown but I think that's purposely done to mock Bush, especially when he says something as the music's making a joke out of him, portraying him to be slightly stupid at times. 

7. What information is given about the Patriot Act?

The Patriot Act is discussed a lot and is used to show how the U.S government really isn't taking the act seriously at all. Which is another example of the government being portrayed badly. It shows that the most serious issues is still not being taken seriously which makes the viewers wonder if the government aren't even taking this seriously what else could they be mocking. The government are shown as being the most powerful people in the world which would fury others if they aren't taking their powerful position sincerely. The documentary also highlights how we were told the bill was printed in the middle of the night but was allegedly not even read, however its been told that it would give police 'almost unlimited power' suggesting how dangerous the new law can be and the abuse it may suffer.

8. What is communicated about President Bush in this last segment? How does the trailer communicate that?

The last segment of the trailer again shows President Bush in a bad light, but after watching the trailer some would question if that's a bad thing. It may not be fair to way up the positives aswell as the negatives Bush has done, but this documentary's main purpose was to unmask hidden secrets not explore the whole of his career. Also everything which was discussed was all fact, so that shows this documentary hasn't manipulated things he has said to look a certain way. Some things in the documentary does portray Bush to look genuinely concerned about the issues in Iraq like when he discusses people at war, how they are doing and the things they are doing to try and help. But moments later hes shown discussing his talent for golf which makes him look as if hes acting a certain way for situations; when the topic of war is brought up he puts on his serious face when the topics finished being discussed its back to stupidity. This also is an example of how he uses his power to show authority. Another slip up from Bush was when he openly said 'some people call you the elite, I call you my base' essentially saying he cares a lot more about the rich and that both the rich and himself depend on each other to have their positions. Which is why the rich are always seen as being the important groups as basically there seen as the governments money soldiers. Also explains why he was in the government for so long, he had the rich people power behind him. Either way the documentary is always going to be criticized as it targeted an extremely strong topic, which often many people would fear to publicly criticize as the government will forever be one of the most powerful objects in society. It has been accused of as a form of brainwashing and blamed for propaganda as the statements are so hard-hitting and exposing but after watching the trailer I felt it wasn't forcing opinions on people but purely making unaware people aware.

TASK C 

1. Summarize using the examples that you have seen so far (and any others you have watched) how documentaries can be used to persuade an audience. Are these types of documentaries subjective or objective?

Documentaries use multiple persuasive techniques as a way of influencing the audience. Often documentaries do not present us with real life, instead they construct a particular version of the real world. Documentaries use specific film techniques to inform, convince and persuade, as a means to position viewers to respond in specific ways. In Fahrenheit 9/11 some techniques were used but a lot of information which was explained was purely facts and informing the audience knowledge which they may not of been aware of before. Emotional appeal was one technique used, this is when the filmmakers use fear, joy or anger to appeal and sway their viewers. Also as a way of adding climax or excitement to the documentary. Michael Moore did this in Fahrenheit 9/11 through revealing George W Bush organised Osama Bin Laden and his family a private airplane during the time of 9/11 which instantly strikes fear into the audience as suggestion that maybe the distressing terrorist attack was all set up by the government. Repetition was also used, repetition is used a lot in documentaries as it can reinforce the message from the filmmaker and also the repetition can emphasis what was said. Michael Moore does this by repeatedly making points about the governments involvement in the 9/11. Appeal to authority is also used, this is when a filmmaker mentions an important event or person to add importance to his/her argument. This was done when congressman Jim Mcdermott was quoted saying 'You can make people do anything if they're afraid', backing up the opinions of the governments misuse of power. Aswell quotes from President Bush backs up the filmmakers opinions. The last technique used was irony which is when something contains more than one meaning, often in the form of sarcasm and a pun. It's often used to add humor or to emphasize an implied meaning under the surface. Michael Moore showed this through the mocking of George W Bush and manipulating certain's things he said to make him look slightly stupid. For example when Bush was discussing the Iraq war Moore manipulated the scene as after Bush said something serious he 'supposedly' referred to his personal life which was mostly edited that way to put Bush in a bad light. Another documentary which uses persuasive techniques is Benefit Street, a channel 4 documentary which exposes what life really is like on benefit's. The filmmakers of Benefit Street are trying to show a new side of benefit users, a side which hasn't really been shown before. Emotional appeal was used throughout the documentary series, one example was when ex drug addict Sam discussed her two children being taken away from her and her fight to get them back, the filmmaker purposely made this scene more distressing by the use of angles (looking down on her to make her seem smaller; fragile and helpless) and adding upsetting music in the background to go with the mood of the scene. Repetition was also used throughout Benefit Street, mostly the repeated message of the benefits these people were given just isn't enough to live on. The use of repeating this messages emphasizes how important this is to the documentary. These types of documentaries are subjective, I believe this because a subjective documentary has to show either a story, opinion or agenda but it still must be based around fact and have counter opinions. Interviews also back up subjective documentaries and both Fahrenheit 9/11 and Benefit Street use interviews throughout. Also the filmmakers have both manipulated their documentaries to back up their opinions. With Fahrenheit 9/11 a lot of the trailer was opinions backed up with fact to make the information shown seem more believable. Also in Benefit Street certain scenes seemed overly dramatized and not so much of a real look on the participants lives. This was done with Becky and Mark's constant struggle with their young son Callum, the scenes were showing repeated struggles the couple had which looked slightly manipulated as surely not every day could be so difficult.