MANUFACTURING DISSENT
**1/2 out of *****

Reviewed by David Cormack

Screening in the 2007 New Zealand International Film Festival
Back to KP's Film Fest Coverage

Genres
Documentary
Movie & TV Making

2007
Written and Directed by
Rick Cain
Debbie Melnyk
Featuring
Michael Moore

Machiavelli, in his piece de resistance The Prince, suggested that for a Prince to gain power or to maintain power, one must be willing to do whatever is necessary to get that power. In a nutshell what Machiavelli was saying is that in most situations, the ends will justify the means. If one subscribes to this theory then Manufacturing Dissent will not bother you. If however, you believe that the means should be moral then prepare to be upset.

Michael Moore has crafted an image of being the left’s poster boy, of working for the working man and looking after the little fellow. He rose to prominence on the back of Roger & Me, his ‘documentary’ on the economic problems facing his hometown of Flint, Michigan when General Motors started pulling its factories out of its hometown. It detailed Michael Moore’s fruitless attempts to talk to Roger Smith, then chairman of General Motors. Moore’s next big splash was Bowling for Columbine, the expose on America’s obsession with guns, he won an Oscar for this film and gained further notoriety when his anti-Bush acceptance speech at the Academy Award’s ceremony was booed; then came Fahrenheit 9-11, Moore’s attack on the Bush presidency and its accusations of election skullduggery; and finally, he’s about to release Sicko, his latest film about the state of the American Healthcare industry.

So what’s Manufacturing Dissent about? It’s the turning of the tables, where the cameras are pointed at Moore and he becomes the subject of his hijack documentary tale. Toronto-based documentary filmmakers Rick Caine and Debbie Melnyk chase Moore across the United States and Canada on his Slackers Uprising Tour prior to the 2004 Presidential Election. The point of their chase is to get an interview with the man. As they continue their chase they learn more and more about Michael Moore’s techniques when making his films. From his selective editing, to his chronological disordering to his out and out misrepresentations (his scene in "Bowling for Columbine" where he claims the gun from the bank has come under heavy fire from a number of sources, see www.moorewatch.com). According to sources, Caine and Melnyk started out as avid Moore supporters and were roused into making a film on him after watching Fahrenheit 9-11. Their original intention was to make a biography of Moore but as they dug deeper and deeper they found a lot of things they didn’t like.

It’s hard not remain skeptical that perhaps they’ve committed some of the same crimes they accuse Moore of; whenever this hijack style is used we can never be sure what gets left on the cutting room floor. Secondly, it’s important to ask does it really matter? That depends on what you view Moore as. If you view him as an entertainer then no it doesn’t. If you view him as a deliverer of a message then again, no it doesn’t; the reason this should be considered important is that Moore purports to be a documentary maker. He won an Academy Award, his industry’s highest honour, in the Documentary category. So if he’s misrepresenting facts is he really a documentarian? The viewer’s answer to this question somewhat dictates whether or not they enjoy the piece.

The biggest criticisms I can level at this film is that it’s really a film for film makers. The documentarians at no stage level any serious criticism of Moore’s films, that his subject matter is wrong or that his overall message is a lie, rather, the tactics he employs are underhanded and deceptive. Tut tut Mr Moore.

The other criticism is that by using Moore’s style on Moore, rather than appear clever they just appear plagiaristic. I’m not a fan of Moore’s style of accosting subjects without notice and of emotionally hijacking films with his own slant (see Jarrod Baker’s review of Jesus Camp for a better analysis of putting a documentary director’s views in his/her work) and we get the same thing in this piece. Ultimately, it feels as though the two producers have fallen victim to what they claim is the ultimate criticism of Moore. Rather than deliver an effective message, they, like Moore, are just interested in celebrity.

This film will screen in Wellington at The Paramount Theatre on August 1 at 6:15pm and on August 3 at 11:15am.

Please refer to the Film Fest homepage for more information on screenings in other parts of the country

Back to KP's Film Fest Coverage