Jesse Walker | January 10, 2005
Nick mentioned the Passion of the Christ/Fahrenheit 9/11 double victory at the People's Choice Awards before I could. I'll just add that I strongly suspect the overlap between the two films' audiences is much larger than those noxious Red and Blue stereotypes would suggest.
Both films have their problems, but if either one deserves an award, the People's Choice seems apt. They were the most populist movies of the last year -- genuinely risky projects that struck a chord and found enormous audiences despite widespread derision. Sure, the awards are fake. For once, the fakes got it right.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
Dammit, Walker! If the comments are good enough for us, they're good enough for you.
My own, probably useless anecdotal experience is that these two movies do appeal to distinct audiences. Not really red vs blue, because most of the people I personally know who liked 9/11 are apolitical rocker/hippy-types, and the people who liked Passion are religious, and also apolitical. But still distinct groups.
While I agree that the red/blue thing is overblown in almost
every case, in this case I agree with Todd.
The question is whether there is any even remotely objective reason
to think either way.
F 9/11 reached way beyond Moore's usual fan base. You'd
be surprised at how many Middle Americans watched it. Didn't
necessarily love it, but watched it.
(And don't forget: Gibson himself seriously considered financing
it.)
Jesse,
Gibson seriously considered financing F911? Do you have a link or
source? This is almost too delicious to be true. Is Gibson some
kind of paleocon antiwar type? Good God, that should be enough to
give the self-appointed "Red State" pseudo-populists a good case of
the shits.
This reminds me of how as a teenager I heard that M*A*S*H and
The Waltons were the two most popular shows on TV, causing me to
grouse with incredulity, "Those shows are so different, who could
possibly like them both?"
My little sister piped up: "I do!"
"Yeah," my father snickered at me, "She does!"
My father could be a real pain....
Kevin: It was a while ago, but if you Google "Michael Moore" and
"Icon Entertainment" (Gibson's company), you'll probably find some
articles on it.
Gibson does seem to be a paleocon antiwar type, though from his
public statements it's hard to tell whether he's strongly antiwar
or simply upset with the way the occupation has been "handled." At
one point last year he mentioned his doubts about the war on the
Sean Hannity show. Being a seasoned journalist with a nose for news
and a gift for the well-placed follow-up question, Hannity rushed
to change the subject.
I think Gibson was Anti-War from a religious stance and not
happy with Bush but I've never heard the backed Moore thing.
I agree with most, the two groups might both be apolitical but I
don't think the same person saw both movies, in general
The Passion brought many people to the theater that probably never
go to the movies.
I forgot to reply to this:
Good God, that should be enough to give the self-appointed "Red
State" pseudo-populists a good case of the shits.
It did give the Red State pseudo-populists a case of the
shits. Just look up the response on Free Republic.
Wow, they managed to get Jason Alexander AND Malcolm
Jamaal-Warner?
"F 9/11 reached way beyond Moore's usual fan base."
Yeah, 3 million of 'em.
Most of the people I personally know who saw either or both these films in the theater and liked them (were particularly affected by them) are yahoos of one stripe or another. Some are yahoos of both stripes.
I saw The Passion in a theater and I liked it. Does that make me a yahoo? You said, "Schmucks see Wayne Newton." I like Wayne Newton. Does that make me a schmuck?
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245