Liberal Documentarians Are the Reel Majority (Lib film majority)

[kskiska]

Left-Leaning Films Get Box-Office Vote

In terms of its success, Michael Moore's "Fahrenheit 9/11" is in uncharted territory. By next week it will probably surpass $100 million in domestic box-office revenues, nearly five times as much as the next-highest-grossing documentary feature -- Moore's own "Bowling for Columbine."

In terms of its politics, though, "Fahrenheit" is strictly par for the course. At a time when the right-leaning Fox News Channel leads all cable news channels, when radio airwaves resound with Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham, when bookstores are piled high with the pronouncements of Bill O'Reilly and Ann Coulter and Bernard Goldberg, one form of nonfiction narrative remains determinedly liberal: the documentary film.

Since the political upheaval of the late 1960s, the liberal point of view has predominated among documentaries -- at least those that get a showing in theaters. From films about opposition to the Vietnam War (1974's "Hearts and Minds," 1979's "The War at Home") to slain black leftist or gay leaders (1971's "The Murder of Fred Hampton," 1984's "The Times of Harvey Milk"); from films about the menace of Republican administrations (1992's "Panama Deception," 2002's "The Trials of Henry Kissinger") to the struggles of coal-mining and meatpacking union workers (1976's "Harlan County U.S.A." and 1991's "American Dream"), most documentaries that approach political issues do so from the left.

"I think it's pretty meaningless for a documentary filmmaker to put six years of his life into a film that reinforces the dominant paradigm," explained Mark Achbar, co-director of "The Corporation," a treatise on the evolution of corporate power that opened last week in Washington. "By default, documentary filmmakers are put in a dissident position because we are being critical of what's happening in the world."

"The people who make documentaries very often come from the left," agreed LA Weekly critic Ella Taylor, "mostly because conservatives are not particularly socially conscious people looking to change the world."

more…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A4005-2004Jul21.html

[TahitiNut]

1. "conservatives are not particularly socially conscious people"

Amen. Unless, of course, "socially conscious" includes peering into the bedrooms of others to ensure they're interacting in the "approved" manner.

[Democat]

2. Conservatives will come rushing in now because they think there is money

Now that Michael Moore has shown them there is money to be made, the right wing will come rushing into the documentary field.

[daleo]

3. Well, rich right wing foundations will have to bankroll them

Because they will soon find out that not too many people are willing to shell out money for the same stuff they can get for free over their TV screens. It is certainly possible that some right wing foundations or sugar daddies will start to do this, and then buy up tickets by the boatload to make it appear there is a market for this sort of thing, though.

[Mechatanketra]

4. Here's a thought.

Maybe the documentary film is more prone to be liberal because, unlike radio, TV, and (to a lesser extent) newspapers and magazines, its audience is its customers, rather than its product. (Fox doesn't sell news. Fox sells news viewers to advertisers.) Hence it's immunized against the primary force that tilts most media towards the physiocratic right-wing.

[mark414]

5. well,

we don't have any other form of media to get our messages out, so we have to do it ourselves. keep up the good work folks!