Cannes award winner: Fahrenheit 911

[nemafakei]

"No man deserves a whole movie against him"

No man merits a whole country either.

Even if you reckon you have the willpower, the intellect, and the morals to be the entire executive of a country of over 250 million, you still have to accept that as one of the main sections of government in of yourself, you are as open to criticism as any other.

[Caid Ivik]

I thought Cannes is an art festival...

[SpiceGuid]

Yes Caid, that's my question: is Cannes an art festival or a political forum?

This politically award seriously hurts the prestige of Cannes as a place for excellence.

(please all, the topic is about Cannes, there are *many* other threads for USA, pro-bush and anti-bush)

[Dunenewt]

Well, this is the PRP board...

[danielsh]

Why must art and politics be distinct and separate entities? Angels in America has been called one of the greatest plays of our era, and is overtly political. As Kushner said, "since it's true that everything is political (though not exclusively so) it becomes meaningless to talk about political and nonpolitical theatre [or art], and more useful to speak of a theatre [or art] that presents the world as it is, an interwoven web of the public and the private."

Politics is life and life politics, so why should art not reflect that?

[Caid Ivik]

Well, I never thought about political documents, like ie Macchiavelli's Prince, as art...

[nemafakei]

A great many pieces of art are clearly also political commentaries as well, from Greek tragedies criticising the sophists onwards to Virgil's Aeneid, part in praise of Augustus, onwards through the ages.

But what the films should be judged on are their merits as films - whether they're politically right or wrong ought to be irrelevent to the award.

[Caid Ivik]

One thing is praise or satire. Other when you make a descriptive document. When I read an encyclopedy I don't look at it as on Balzac.

[Dante]

Why must art and politics be distinct and separate entities? Angels in America has been called one of the greatest plays of our era, and is overtly political. As Kushner said, "since it's true that everything is political (though not exclusively so) it becomes meaningless to talk about political and nonpolitical theatre [or art], and more useful to speak of a theatre [or art] that presents the world as it is, an interwoven web of the public and the private."

Politics is life and life politics, so why should art not reflect that?

Good points. But really I'm only replying to say that Angels in America really is a fantastic play (though I admit I've only ever seen the televised version).

[SurlyPIG]

Actually, Michael Moore loves the 99% of America that isn't made up of super-rich money-grubbers and their puppets in government.

More accurately, Michael moore loves the 99% of America that isn't made up of the super-rich money-grubbers and their puppets in government because they buy his movies and books.

[danielsh]

Good points. But really I'm only replying to say that Angels in America really is a fantastic play (though I admit I've only ever seen the televised version).

Thanks, and buy the play! Kushner may be a bit left for you, but he's a brilliant, brilliant man. (A huge Marxist, too: Hydriotaphia is a play all about primitive capital accumulation, and most of his other plays focus on the idea that conflict drives all things---which, if I'm not mistaken, is a Marxist sentiment.) But whatever you believe about his politics, his writing is genius.

[TMA_1]

It isnt the political aspect that bothers me as much as Michael Moore won in the Cannes Film Festival! lol

I mean his films do a decent job getting the point across, but because they can be so biased and choppy, and the fact that he isnt exactly the best writer/director in the world, it just seems that the artistic merit of it all was not why he won, but purely political in it's motives. This is bad because it is about the best film out there, and Michael Moore does NOT make the best films in the world.lol Now I dont know all of the films that made it in the festival, but if Michael Moore won with one of his movies, then the others must have been horrible.lol

[danielsh]

FT.com expressed a similar sentiment, actually. (Disclaimer: I haven't seen the movie. I can't speak to its artistic value---heretofore, I've simply been arguing against the separation of art & politics. The following opinions are not my own.)

http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1084907786503

Only one explanation for the prize. The jury, like many festivalgoers, were in agitprop heat. They just loved the ra-ra radicalism. The unsung signature tune on the Croisette was (with apologies to Broadway), "The temperature's rising/It isn't surprising," and only a few killjoys muttered a rearrangement of the next lines: "You certainly can/Can Cannes." If not the whole event, then assuredly the jury. Shove them in a tin and preserve them as a "How Not To" example to succeeding festival panels.

[HasimirFenring]

Has anyone seen the movie yet?  I saw it last night.  Very well done from an artistic standoint (in my opinion), and also tells us important facts that we should be aware of.

Sadly, it has only served to make me more cynical.