Filmmaker Morgan Spurlock throws a nasty knuckle-curve in the opening minutes of his latest film.
The “Super Size Me” creator vows to track down the most wanted man on the planet in “Where in the World is Osama Bin Laden?” now out on DVD.
We’re told Spurlock is about to become a father, and his baby will be much safer if Public Enemy no. 1 is behind bars.
Riggggght. It’s a scam, obviously, an obtuse setup made in questionable taste. But what’s the punchline? What’s he driving at?
The first animated sequence is the tip off. The U.S. is to blame for Osama and his ilk since we often side with dictators or quasi-dictators to help us against our enemies. Who saw that coming?
It’s our fault governments like Egypt restrict freedom, since the U.S. gives aid to its leadership. But don’t other countries also supply aid or at least trade with these countries? Why isn’t Spurlock calling them out? And what if we stopped the aid pipeline tomorrow? Imagine the PR drubbing President Bush would take for that? I suspect Spurlock would be at the front of the line to protest the move.
Back to the movie.
Spurlock delights when one of his cherry-picked sources says “the war on terror” is a bogus term. Not a minute later we’re told terrorist cells now exist across the globe. Well, do you wanna fight those cells, or just fight the phrase “war on terror?”
The film is intellectually dishonest when it’s not being lazy, and constantly referring to Osama and his mates as wacky cartoon characters obscures their brutal actions. Sometimes, we get actual snippets of the atrocities they commit, but these sequences merely take the film’s wacky tone and scramble it beyond recognition.
The Middle Easterners Spurlock runs into fall into two camps. One consists of sweet, kindhearted people who blame everything bad in their lives on America. The others … well, let’s just say they’d be happy if the U.S. of A. was no more.
And it’s pathetic when the film tries to pin terrorist recruitment primarily on poverty when some terrorists, like the group who committed the attacks of 9/11, were far from poor.
Plus, when people in the U.S. and other Western countries have no money, they either turn to petty crimes, become addicts, commit serious felonies or just make do. They don’t wake up one day and slap on a suicide belt. But some Middle Easterners do.
Hmmm, I wonder what the difference is between poor people in the West and their peers abroad? Might be worth exploring in the documentary format.
Worst of all, “Where in the World” isn’t funny, enlightening or even heart-tugging. Why is Spurlock leaving his very pregnant wife alone in the first place?
She’s merely the latest prop in his gimmick-laden young career.
(Photo: Quasi-documentarian Morgan Spurlock visits the Middle East in “Where in the World is Osama bin Laden?”)
{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }
Chase 09.26.08 at 2:50 pm
Don’t want to get into too much of a political fight with you on this, but I have to wonder, what if a foreign country, say, France, felt the United States wasn’t doing enough to track down a group of criminals, and began using jet fighters to bomb places they suspected their crimials were hiding, and by accident started blowing up civilians … wouldn’t we be peeved?
I think it’s not so much the fact that we’re pursuing non-government affiliated criminals, but the way that we’re doing it.
Yesterday, sending flights across the Pakistan border — a country we’re allied with — without permission sparked that country’s soldiers to fire on a U.S. helicopter, and our troops fired back … what the hell is that about.
Are we going to open fire on Canada next, in the name of pursuing criminals?
cftoto 09.26.08 at 2:57 pm
There’s plenty of room for reasonable debate on how to fight terrorism, and also room to critique specific US actions. But “Where in the World” doesn’t traffic in reasonable debate. Its silly arguments are bolstered by cartoon sequences, and its critiques of US foreign policy are made by people unwilling to so much as suggest their culture, or their governments, could be a huge part of the problem.
And if it’s all the U.S.’s fault, like the film tells us again and again, why are so many other countries getting bombed? And why was there so much terrorism before President Bush took the oath of office? The film is deeply insincere in its arguments, and that’s the point I’m making in my review.
Chase 09.26.08 at 3:33 pm
I totally get that point, and I haven’t seen the film, just noting that there is room for debate, as you did … Kool-Aid drinking, no matter which side, is bad … or as Ferris said,
“-Ism’s in my opinion are not good. A person should not believe in an -ism, he should believe in himself. I quote John Lennon, “I don’t believe in The Beatles, I just believe in me.” Good point there. After all, he was the walrus.”
jic 09.27.08 at 3:33 am
Chase, the military claims that the helicopter never crossed the border in the first place. Until proof is provided that it did in fact cross into Pakistani territory, the possibility remains that the Pakistani troops actually attacked our troops inside Afghanistan.