Naturally I haven't seen the movie, but it sounds remarkably similar to "Columbine" in that it is sold as answering a question, but does nothing but repeat platitudes.
I'll bet the movie does nothing to explain why 9/11 happened, or the decade long context of Iraq. Columbine was strange - it posed the question why gun violence is prevalent in America, a good question, but does little to answer it.
I saw Bowling for Columbine. It was terrible, as much for its (lack of style) and sophmoric scripting as for its "message." Not only is Michael Moo astonishingly wrong on everything politically, he really does suck as a director - at least if Columbine is any measure. No matter your politics, this cow's fare simply ain't worth watching.
>>Columbine was strange
I agree. It started off mocking the US gun culture, then implicated the media for its incessant alarmism and depictions of violence. Then it seemed to veer into blaming racism and lack of socialized medicine for gun violence. It was a disorganized movie that didn't seem to make a real point.
I won't see F911. Not because it's anti-Bush, but rather because Moore's documentary talents have diminished as he has become more strident and eager to persuade. "Roger and Me" was funny and interesting even though it was anti-business. But BFC was just ham-handed agitprop, and I expect F911 to be the same.