Record Breaker?

So there's a lot of talk going on right now about this film. Some have even gone so far as to mention nominations for Oscars. I have little desire to see the film for several reasons, none of which I will delve into at this moment. The news sources have been proclaiming the box office records that it has broken (for a film of it "type"). That is what I would like to post on right now - the film's "type".

It is being marketed as a documentary. It is being promoted as such. It is being sold as such. It is being hyped as such. But is it a documentary?

Merriam-Webster defines a documentary as being factual, objective.

That being accepted as my definition of a documentary, I must therefore refuse to even call this film as such. If I wish to refer to the events of September 11th in the form of a documentary, I will cite the amazing film 9/11, which aired twice on public television and is available on DVD/VHS.

It is truly a documentary. It presents the events as they happened, from a very real perspective (as it was happening). There is no bias towards politics or war, just incredible images captured on film as they were transpiring. A true documentary attemps to show history as it happened - as completely as possible. Without bias and without alterior motive.

This new film may break records and may be controversial and may cause people to question things, but it is not a historical view of the events as they happened. It is one man's crusade to further impact an upcoming election. It is also my opinion that Michael Moore is an opportunist in almost every way. While overseas, he has made comments that are severely critical of Americans. And there's nothing wrong with that, until you also attempt to pander to them while you are among them. Which Moore does without hesitation. This movie will be successful without a doubt. Moore already has made more than his investment back, and the hype he has helped create is priceless free advertising. Perhaps he should turn around and quickly donate all of the proceeds to John Kerry's campaign - thus assisisting further his desire to see President Bush removed from office. If it means so much to him, let's see him put his money where his mouth is. He won't, because he wants his money. And he will get it...

But it won't be due to the success of a moment of history he helped document.
It will be due to the success of his biased, one-sided, politically motivated diatribe of a film.
And that is fine - it's the American way.

I just refuse to call the film a documentary...