In the interest of providing something of interest, however, I'm tipping you to one of the many features on Michael Moore. This one is hardly the best, but it may be one of the most important, not to mention indicative of Moore's standing in Middle American, since it ran in USA Today.
The reasons I dislike that newspaper are the same reasons why I'm heartened to see some attempt at a "fair and balanced" assessment of Moore's career and of Fahrenheit 9/11 in particular.
I'm also heartened by the fact that my parents, who see about one movie per year outside their house, brought up the idea of seeing the movie with me next Saturday in the Bay Area because they want to make sure to see it right away. That may not sound like a big deal, I realize, but if you understood their habits, you'd realize that this bodes well for the reach of the publicity surrounding the film.
I should add, in closing, that I've always had mixed feelings about Moore as a filmmaker and celebrity. He has always struck me as too self-aggrandizing and too willing to settle for cheap shots. At this point in our nation's history, though, I'm bracketing my reservations. Someone has to stand up to the assholes. And if that means having assholes on our side, so be it.
Boromir did some good before he gave into temptation, then redeemed himself a bit. Han Solo did a hell of a lot, despite his feigned apathy. And Achilles, as played by body hair-free Brad Pitt, ended up taking one for the team as well. Why not Michael Moore?