Reviews

The only reason I didn't score this a one is that Sibrel does show that he is adept at the technical aspects of making a film. It is a technically adept film.

That having been said, this is a film based on lies and distortions that are quite easily disproven. Most of the documentary is spent using propaganda techniques to bash the space program, rather than actual fact. And Sibrel's "irrefutable proof" that the landings were faked is easily refuted if you know anything about orbital mechanics.

I do not recommend watching this, but if you do, see it at google video for free. Don't let Bart Sibrel profit from your curiosity.

If you like movies that are character driven, then this is one for you to watch.

I have never seen Scarlett Johanssen in anything before. I have to say she impressed me here with her performance as Pursalane Hominy Will (ain't that a mouthful of a name!). Travolta does a nice turn as the titular Bobby Long, a former English professor who has fallen into the depths of an alcohol induced fantasy life. Gabriel Macht also does a good job as Lawson Pines, Bobby Long's former teaching assistant who has accompanied Long into his descent out of a sense of loyalty and guilt.

Perhaps the most interesting character, to me, is the one you never see, Lorraine Will; a New Orleans diva and the mother of young Pursey. Lorraine's death from alcoholism is what brings our characters together, and much like Alex in The Big Chill, we never once see or hear from Lorraine (not even in voice-over when Pursey reads a letter never sent to her by Lorraine), but we experience her through the people in this movie. It is a brave choice for the director to make, as I believe others would opt for more direct exposition via flashback, voice-overs, etc.

In the end, while there is a certain formulaic approach to the story, the characters are done well enough that you enjoy the story anyway.

Let's drop the polarized nonsense and tell the truth about this movie and it's counterpart. Neither of these are worth consideration of either a 10 or a 1. All that is is further extension of the partisan nonsense we continue to find ourselves embroiled in.

Now, as for this flick. Is it entertaining? To a certain degree, it is. Zell Miller's analogy of the copperhead snake under the porch is simply wonderful, and Ron Silver is as witty as they come. However, a movie like this is not meant as entertainment.

Is it well made? For being a low budget documentary, it comes across rather well.

Here's the most important question: Is it effective in getting it's point across. I have to answer emphatically, yes! It has been well documented, not only by this movie but elsewhere (Dave Kopel's 59 Deceits in F9/11 web page is the most comprehensive I've seen), that Micheal Moore uses "truth" and "facts" in such a manner as to present a misleading picture. This movie goes a long way in deconstructing Moore's methods, and supplying the context Moore often leaves out.

Do I think it's the greatest movie ever? Sorry, that place will forever be held in my mind by Star Wars. But I do think that it is an effective little documentary that acts as a counter to Moore's polemic propaganda.

7/10