Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11 opened in theaters on Friday. In my area it's showing on one of about 40 available screens. The small, locally owned, "indie" theater opted to show the film, and according to a newspaper article, has been getting harassing e-mail and phone calls over it. I disapprove of that kind of harassment even more than I disapprove of Michael Moore. My opinion is that Moore will likely damage his career with this film, maybe even destroy it, and we should let him. These days, half or maybe most of the success of a movie is judged by it's DVD shelf life. Who will be interested in Fahrenheit 9/11 after the election? No one. That's bound to shape the way the studios view Michael Moore with regard to financial viability.

You can't swing a dead cat without hitting a positive review of the film. Who didn't see that coming? Movie reviewers, the bastard children of the liberal media and the far-left in Hollywood, seem to start frantically salivating at the mere mention of Michael Moore. There are, however, a few negative reviews out there, and it's my pleasure to bring you some highlights:

James Berardinelli for ReelViews
"There are a series of interviews with Lila Lipscomb, whose son (Michael) died in Iraq. Moore first films her when Michael is still alive, and she's a staunch patriot. Later, he returns so she can recount how her son died. She reads the final letter he sent to her, and makes a cathartic trek to Washington D.C. to see the White House and curse the man living inside. It's poignant material, but Moore's reputation robs this portion of his film of its potential power. Because we don't know how much of this is real."

David Poland of The Hot Button
"Moore, The Liberal Most Likely to make the argument with wit and insight and facts that may border on falsehood but which compel nonetheless, has come up with little more than a recruiting film for people who are still bitter about the election of 2000."

Todd McCarthy for Variety (Registration Required)
"The sporadically effective docu trades far more in emotional appeals than in systematically building an evidence-filled case against the president and his circle."

Michael Sragow for the Baltimore Sun
"This movie doesn't sustain a single tone or argument. All that unifies Fahrenheit 9/11 is contempt for the Bush administration...(The movie contains)one of Moore's abrasive man-in-the-street stunts: accosting congressmen and trying to persuade them to get their kids to volunteer for the Iraq war. (Only one congressman has a child fighting in Iraq.) Moore confronts (among others) Mark Kennedy, a Minnesota Republican, who in reality declared that he'd be happy to cajole his colleagues, 'especially those who voted for the war,' then noted, 'I have a nephew on his way to Afghanistan.' In the movie, all we see is Kennedy reacting to Moore's offer with a bizarre look of disbelief."

Lou Lumenick in the New York Post
"Michael Moore's much-hyped and very heavy-handed polemic against George W. Bush, is basically a two-hour argument for regime change that isn't half as incendiary or persuasive as its maker would have you believe."

Fred Topel at About.com
"Moore has resorted to showing us stuff that The Daily Show covers all the time...Then it degenerates into shameless pathos...Regardless of politics, this is not effective filmmaking. Talking heads and existing video footage aren't all that compelling... Sadly, what is most evident from Fahrenheit 9/11 is that Michael Moore now believes his own hype. He thinks he can just say shocking things, show people suffering and he'll make his point. Maybe he will get his message out to more people than ever, thanks to the controversy he's generated since Bowling for Columbine and his Oscar speech. Right now it seems like he's only preaching to the choir. Most of Hollywood is politically liberal, and so far it's only been Hollywood who's embraced the film. "

Joe Morgenstern at the Wall Street Journal (Registration Required)
"(Fahrenheit 9/11 is) a postmodern, postliterary piece of agitprop, coming at a time when truth is often the first victim in supermarket tabloids, radio talk shows, campaign commercials on network TV and gabble-fests on cable."

And, finally, if you're curious about why the movie received the R rating, be sure and check out the ScreenIt.com account of the blood, gore, and violence in the movie. And all of it is real, not special effects, remember that. And remember that Moore fought to have the film re-rated PG-13. Obviously, Michael Moore is dealing with a lot of emotional issues and personal demons... but why on earth would he want children to see such a movie? The man must be driven by an awful cruelty.