Countermentary and antiganda

I just finished reading an article from Time Magazine about Michael Moore and the new phenomenon they dubbed "poli-tainment". They basically crown Moore as the king and creator of the political but entertaining documentary genre. Although they mention a few other politically focused documentaries circulating now (such as "The Hunting of the President") given the way Hollywood works one can certainly expect a plethora of "me too" poli-tainment flicks to be on their way to a screen near you any day soon.

My prediction is that most of them will be miserable flops and truly deserving of the label "propaganda". The reason is I think their raison detre (reason for existence) will be to make big bucks which is completely the opposite to that behind Fahrenheit 9/11. A cash inspired Fahrenheit wannabe will surely be an empty and hollow vessel that will draw so much derision from all sides that it will sully the genre with a bad name.

Although I have previously 'fessed up to agreeing with the label of propaganda for Moore's flick, I think that it would actually be more deserving of a description such as "antiganada", "counterganda" or "countermentary". The reason is I think that Moore would never had made Fahrenheit had our media at large being even close to balanced, or possessed the high standards of investigatory and critical reporting that so many lambasted him for neglecting in Fahrenheit. His cunning was to decide that if he can't get the establishment to fix the prevailing mediocrity of the media in reporting what is really going on he could at least address and challenge public apathy by generating a harsh "antiganada" (propaganda deliberately designed to counter the prevailing propaganda) to balance things out. Think of it like trying to put out an oil well fire - the fire makes it too hot to get to the spigot to turn off the oil. One can't put out the fire by convential means - one simply cannot pour the water or whatever on fast enough. Instead one must resort to massive blast of high explosive that literally blows the fire out. Fahrenheit was Moore's high explosive counterspin blast.

Moore went on to make a flick that paid very close attention to factual accuracy, setting such a high standard that he has even talked about a $10,000 reward for anyone who uncovers a factual error in the movie. He then went on to juxtapose the facts in such a way as to create a very provocative message and one that just happened to counter the prevailing spin that has followed the Bush White House ever since 9/11. He reminds us of how it was before, he shows us stunning footage of the Bush election that was quietly side-lined or left on the cutting room floor by the media at that time. He digs up incriminating facts that were censored by the White House to protect the president's credibility. He reminds us how different things were even two years ago and reminds us how quickly we forget and adapt to the latest prevailing spin and propaganda from the White House and media.

I truly believe there wont be any Hollywood inspired me-too's that come close to Fahrenheit in their impact and credibility, they will always be in a different league. After all, if you look and listen closely you'll find that Fahrenheit's central thesis is "Wake up America - the system is broken, it's time to change!". Even if you're not listening and seeing that message, it's still there, subliminally, which is why it gets to people, even the ones that don't want to hear it. They are forced to respond in some way. Why would Hollywood, which is for the most part so much a cog of that very system take part in creating movies with such a message? They wont.

Hollywood may weigh in long after the fight is over, making movies about lies and dirty tricks by tobacco and power companies but only long after they have been tried and convicted in court. They may make realistic and or heart rending movies about the Holocaust, Vietnam, and Somalia but long after the wars are over and the dead are buried. Its simply never been Hollywood's place or desire or cash incentive to weigh in on current events. Perhaps they worry that to present movie goers with an alternating diet of fact and fiction, fantasy and reality will be too much for them? But in a world whereeverything you see on the TV news, read in the paper or even in a secret government report, is taken literally as fact without a second thought, why do they worry - the battle is over and people are already dazed and confused, unable to distinguish truth from fiction, unable to apply any standard of critical thinking to what they read and see.

So go ahead Hollywood, start making some summer blockbuster documentaries, so long as you throw in a happy ending, some villains and heroes, a few tens of millions in marketing and plush dolls for the kids to buy at McDonald's you're sure of at least a one or two thumbs up from Joe Public.