Me versus Jim Schembri.
Last week the Age film critic, Jim Schembri, reviewed Michael Moore's film Fahrenheit 9-11 . While suggesting that the documentary had problems as a piece of film-making, he also said that Moore's case against Bush was simplistic and selective. That pissed me off, and I wrote to him. Then he wrote back. Then I wrote back. Then he wrote back. It was quite the frenzy.
In the end, he printed some of our emails in his EG column yesterday. But here's the uncensored version.
From: ms fits [ mailto:freakymissus@yahoo.com.au]
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 2:56 PM
To: Jim SCHEMBRI
Subject: F 9-11
But wasn't the case 'for' war merely biased propaganda too? George W's insistence that the moustachioed towel-head was responsible for all our problems so we should just bomb him and end terror forever?
If the WMD argument wasn't entirely selective in its editing then I don't know what is.
I feel you failed to mention that in your article, Jim. I never pinned you as a right-wing apologist.
Ms Fits.
On 30/7/04 3:17 PM, "Jim SCHEMBRI"
Thank you very much for your letter, Ms Fits.
The piece was very careful to address the shortcomings in the film, to
highlight its bias and monumental lack of balance. It is not primarily a piece about Moore's politics, but about his skills as a filmmaker. It is, after all, a film review.
Saying he should have covered certain issues and mentioned certain important facts is to comment on the quality of the film. I asked questions that the film would have been better for addressing. It's Moore's bias that keeps him from considering issues in a way that people who are not already on his side can take seriously.
I've been hearing this argument that ``well, the right have been one-sided in their version of the war, therefore Moore is entitled to be just as one-sided''. I find this tit-for-tat defense of the film absolute nonsense. If you feel the other side has been biased in its presentation, responding likewise does no good at all. Surely you should hold yourself to a higher standard and take an intelligent approach to the facts, not merely clone the mistakes of your enemy. You don't fight fire with fire, you fight it with water. It is all opinion, at the end of the day. As is made clear in the piece, I like Moore's TV show and do give him credit for some extraordinary sequences that people like Hitchens didn't like.
Thank you again for your letter.
Yours
Jim Schembri
The Age
From: ms fits [ mailto:freakymissus@yahoo.com.au]
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 3:29 PM
To: Jim SCHEMBRI
Subject: Re: F 9-11
I suppose the tit-for-tat thing is fair enough. I also think you should have said that in your article to shut bleeding heart lefties like me up. It makes sense, and I hadn't thought of it like that as I am quite biased and pig-headed.
I wondered if journos should - or even could - review F 9-11 as a stand-alone doco when really, it is so a part of worldwide politics. As a documentary yes, it is simplistic and wouldn't win many awards. But as a thermometer for social change it is blistering and I cried like an idiot throughout.
Ms Fits.
On 30/7/04 3:39 PM, "Jim SCHEMBRI"
Dear Ms Fits,
please do not denigrate yourself for being a bleeding-heart leftie. The world needs bleeding-heart lefties. It also needs filmmakers who care about the difference between documentary and propaganda.
Ma'am, thank you for one of the most amusing and delightful e-mails I've received for a long while. I would like to print our exchange in next week's column. It would make great reading. (We could replace the word "idiot''). I hope you agree.
Yours sincerely
Jim Schembri
The Age
From: ms fits [mailto:freakymissus@yahoo.com.au]
Sent: Friday, July 30, 2004 3:52 PM
To: Jim SCHEMBRI
Subject: Re: F 9-11
Mr. Schembri
I am more than happy for you to print our 84 Charing Cross road-esque correspondence. And please don't feel the need to omit the word 'idiot'. Those sitting in my immediate vicinity at the cinema will attest to the fact that the word is more than fitting. The state of world affairs is enough to send normally level-headed young ladies such as myself into floods of tears these days I'm afraid.
I remain, yours sincerely,
Ms 'Hanff' Fits.
On 30/7/04 4:01 PM, "Jim SCHEMBRI"
Dear Ms Fits,
this is great. I've been trying to make the column more interactive and our exchange will make terrific reading. I like the fact that readers have strong feelings and a sense of humour.
If it's ok, I may send you an e-mail copy of the piece as it will appear, with my little introduction.
Thank you again. Keep reading us - and keep responding. It's what helps make this gig intersting!
yours sincerely
Jim Schembri
The Age
On 04/08/04 11:13 AM, "Jim SCHEMBRI"
Dear Ms Fits,
here is what is going in the paper this week. I wanted you to have the last word, so I did a small bit of editing by moving a line from your very last e-mail to the previous one. It works very well and you may not even notice. You make a strong point that highlights the passion of people who agree with Moore's line and I wanted to finish with that. (It's also boring to have the journo have the last word.)
Thank you again for your correspondence. Write in anytime about anything.
Yours
Jim Schembri
The Age
From: ms fits [ mailto:freakymissus@yahoo.com.au]
Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 2004 2:33 PM
To: Jim SCHEMBRI
Subject: Re: F 9-11 letter
Dear Jim Schembri
I and my people unequivocally give our approval of the piece. And thank-you for giving me the last word. It is an unusual occurrence that happens mostly in the grips of mildly shrill hysteria.
I have no idea of the prelude you will be writing to the article, but if you plan on referring to me in any way as either a hippy or a juvenile bumlord I will withdraw my approval at once.
I remain, sincerely yours
Ms Fits
On 04/08/04 2:40 PM, "Jim SCHEMBRI"
Dear Ms fits,
you write terrific letters.
Actually the intro is quite innocuous. I should have sent it earlier. It appears below.
The film continues to set records and stir debate. November will be an interesting time!
Good cheer to you.
Jim Schembri
The Age
As expected, we got some heated responses to last week's feature review of Michael Moore's controversial pseudo-documentary Fahrenheit 9/11. Opinion is clearly as passionate as it is divided over the film's virtues, and I would like to share with you an email exchange I had with a reader, which I reprint with permission.
-----Original Message-----
Comments
JOIN YOUR CONSERVATIVE BROTHERS TODAY @ HTTP://YOUNGLIBERALS.BLOGSPOT.COM
Gracious, you're annoying.
Ms Fits, I think you and Jimbo need to get a room! If I didn't know better, I'd suggest you were typing your emails to Mr Schembri with only one hand, if you know what I mean, and I'm sure you do, and on second thought, I believe I _DO_ know better, and I think that was _EXACTLY_ what you were doing!
Huzzah!
BEVIS, I cannot believe you'd even suggest that while corresponding with Mr. Schembri that the lovely and respectible Ms. Fits was stroking her squirrel, fingering the meat lips, tickling the sweet bean or scuffing her muff. To just out and say that she was finger-licking the lilly, stroking the golden honey pot, touching-up her Georgia O'Keefe, or massaging the bearded clam is utterly disrespectful and you should apologize for you crassness at once!
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
I presume this PN boy is taking the piss? Or is he some bespectacled young geek taking some time out from humping livestock?
Whatever he is, as soon as I stop finding him mildly amusing I will bin him like the god of blog I am.
kranki, you make a good point. I must have been delusional when I wrote that - I don't know what came over me. (Maybe it was Ms Fits!)
Ahem, excuse me. (Good shot, though, Ms Fits! That's quite a talent you've got there!)
Please don't bin me!
Comments are closed.