Movies in a year of politics

Everyone not living in a cave knows that this is a presidential election year. But this year partisan politics are at their worst with the right wing conservatives calling the left-wing weak on terror and the left-wing calling the right wing misguided. Interestingly, not only is this the most divisive election in recent history, but individual voices in cinema have weighed in very heavily this election. Of course this is a presidential election year and there are often stars who come forward with their political views, Susan Sarandon, Bruce Willis, and Barbra Streisand to name a few over the years. But this year it seems that the messages have been less moderate and yet more pervasive to mainstream America.

Of course as a journalist I will try to be objective about this presentation, but that is not always possible. Take for instance the film Control Room, a documentary behind the scenes of Al Jazeera the Arab news network. Al Jazeera states that they try to be objective, but to a Western audience their policy of showing graphic footage of bombings and beheadings seems inflammatory. They seem to incite anti-American sentiment by showing civilian casualties of bombings. As everyone knows, all war carries with it some human toll and no matter how smart the bomb there are going to be civilian casualties, but to plaster them on television heightens the already rampant tensions in the region.

Then there is the issue of Rathergate, of course this is not a film topic, but it bears mention here anyway. It has been argued that fraudulent documents were used on Dan Rather’s story on Bush’s National Guard record because there was not sufficient check or the results of fact checking were ignored. This was chalked up to an over eagerness to knock the conservatives down a peg. This has been made a major issue not only because the documents were wrong, but because there are questions about the motives behind the story and its rush to release. Of course ever news venue wants to rush. They want to be the first to release the story, provide an ‘exclusive’ look at whatever topic they are covering. The American people rely on the media to fact check themselves on the data they release so that we can rely on it as truth. The upheaval here shows that the system works by and large, that incorrect facts are checked and shot down if they are found to be wrong.

Our opinions, our upbringing, and our beliefs always color what we do. The interesting thing is that this year blatantly coloring ones work to mirror ones perspective is not only acceptable, it is the norm. Take for instance Fahrenheit 9/11 from the master of manipulation Michael Moore who twists and distorts facts in his one man crusade against the Bush administration. Though he stated at Cannes that he wanted to make movies not political statements, Fahrenheit 9/11 showcases Moore’s bias against President George W Bush and Moore’s questioning of the motives for the actions that Bush has taken as President of the United States. Or look at The Passion of the Christ which was backed by conservative religious groups and appealed to masses of Christians. The Passion of the Christ could have been a mediocre film released to mediocre box office, but it has become a lightning rod for Christians to revisit past violence that mirrors the violence of the post-9/11 world.

On February 25th, 2004 Mel Gibson’s film The Passion of the Christ was released to great hoopla and greater box office receipts. This 30 Million dollar movie has grossed more than 370 million dollars in the US alone and has become a rallying point for conservative Christians. Recently The Passion of the Christ came out on video and has been selling briskly. The film, which tells the story of Jesus’ last days and crucifixion, was extremely violent yet it has been seen by a widely diverse audience. The film may have been lambasted for its excessive violence and mediocre storytelling but it resonated with the American public and caused many ministers to admonish their parishioners to go see the movie and reflect on their religious beliefs. In some instances religious leaders even suggested taking children to see this graphic and gory R rated movie.

On the other side of the field stands Michael Moore and his opinion piece masked as a documentary Fahrenheit 9/11. This 6 million dollar film has grossed more than 180 million in the US and caused an uproar from the conservatives in Congress and across the nation. Michael Moore has made a career of creating pseudo-documentaries where he melds facts and interviews and his own often ridiculous stunts into an opinion piece on topics ranging from outsourcing, to America’s weapons culture, to the current Administration’s Iraq policy. In the process Moore has created a new kind of film where the documentarian abandons objective viewing and becomes an active participant in the film and its message. In Fahrenheit 9/11 Moore pulls no punches taking on the Bush Administration head on with a rather biased view of the war on terror and the war in Iraq. The partisan sniping going on in Hollywood is such a part of this year’s campaign that Moore even appeared at the Republican National Convention where Senator John McCain called Moore ‘a disingenuous film maker who would have us believe that Saddam’s Iraq was an oasis of peace’ drawing boos from the Republican faithful and drawing a wave and a laugh from Moore himself. This sort of activity gives Moore and his film much more credence and credibility than most movie directors ever garner for their films in topical relevancy.

And let us not forget the most startling and powerful development, the election of Hollywood superstar Arnold Schwarzenegger to the governorship of California following the recall of Gray Davis. This action not only changed the makeup of that state’s politics, but it gave the Republican Party a new and powerful weapon. The charismatic Schwarzenegger is now viewed as a serious politician and he is able to stump for the Republicans both nationally, as in his convention speech, and locally. Though he probably can’t deliver them the highly Democratic state of California, he has been aiding in local elections and even stumping for Bush in other states.

This year’s political debate is much more polarized than in years past as is the electoral. It is interesting to see that both parties have films to rally around this year. These are politically charged films that espouse the values of their core constituency. On one hand there are the conservatives rallying around a film of religion, and on the other are the liberals rallying around a film based on the principals of freedom of speech and opposition to the war in Iraq. The most interesting part is how both parties have embraced or vilified these films lending them such immediacy and relevancy to the upcoming election. It is not surprising that the studios have released these films on video within weeks of each other and only weeks before the presidential election to capitalize on the influence that these films have had this election year.

Related posts:

1. Fahrenheit 9/11