accessAtlanta

Passion, ambition exceed balance in 'Why We Fight'

Documentarian Eugene Jarecki takes the title of his new film "Why We Fight" from Frank Capra's celebrated series of superpatriotic World War II government-sponsored newsreels. Jarecki's intention, however, is ironic. "Why We Shouldn't Fight" might be a more accurate title.

Sony Pictures Classics 'Why We Fight' B- The verdict: Definitely more one-sided essay than balanced documentary, but it has a lot of passion and some eye-opening facts. Director: Eugene Jarecki Cast: John S.D. Eisenhower, Chalmers Johnson, William Kristol, John McCain Run time: 98 minutes Release date: Jan. 20, 2006 Rating: PG-13 for disturbing war images and brief language. See showtimes On the web Official movie site View the trailer    Trailers require Quicktime [an error occurred while processing this directive]

Aging former hippies may be surprised to learn it was President Dwight D. Eisenhower who first cautioned America against the military-industrial complex. In a 1961 speech, he warned that the unholy alliance of Big Money and Big Guns wasn't a good idea. That it would create a permanently militarized United States.

Or, as "Li'l Abner" cartoonist Al Capp put it: What's good for Gen. Bullmoose is good for the USA.

Things have turned out much as Ike predicted. Every president since FDR has found something going on somewhere in the world he didn't like and then sent troops to make it better. Only, in the brave new world of economic imperialism, we don't occupy their countries; Christian Dior and Pepsi do, as the movie shows.

"Why We Fight" opens with a pair of giant missiles jutting out like Jane Russell's, um, bra in "The Outlaw" and silhouetted against a calmly beautiful, Carolina-blue sky. Jarecki ("The Trials of Henry Kissinger") loves this sort of obvious juxtaposition. A young pilot talks enthusiastically about dropping his first bombs on Baghdad, and the movie cuts to dead bodies amid the rubble, many of them clearly children. Don Ho sings "Tiny Bubbles" when the movie visits an arms trade show. And so on. And so forth.

Originality isn't "Why We Fight's" strong point. Nor is evenhandedness. Jarecki does talk to a couple of conservatives — among them John McCain, who wonders, "When does a force for good become a force for imperialism?"

But mostly, the film preaches to the choir, with a parade of liberal talking heads telling us what we expect to hear. Gore Vidal gets off the best shot, referring to us as a nation that never learns, the "United States of Amnesia."

The most affecting voice is that of Wilton Sekzer, a retired New York City cop (and Vietnam veteran) who lost his son on Sept. 11. Sekzer voted for Bush, supported the invasion of Iraq and then was shocked to learn there were no WMDs after all. And that Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with the World Trade Center tragedy. "The government exploited my patriotism," he says, with as much sadness as resentment.

Other "regular folks," i.e., the yahoos who don't live in big cities, are treated with off-putting condescension. Look at these geeks, the movie practically sneers, with their flag-waving parades and Dollar Stores and all-you-can-eat buffets.

Yet given all that, "Why We Fight" is still a very effective cautionary essay with some eye-opening statistics and archival material. For instance, we see how much think tanks have a hand in shaping foreign policy. So much so that Air Force Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski retired from her job as an officer at the Pentagon, saying she witnessed too many outside forces dictating military decisions. And we also see a discomfiting early clip of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam.

Jarecki's tactics have a lot in common with Michael Moore's, but he doesn't create an inflammatory three-ring circus a la "Fahrenheit 9/11." On the one hand, that's a good thing in that his polemic comes across as more measured. On the other, it's a bad thing because the movie falls into repetitive and familiar anti-Bush stratagems.

"Why We Fight" has passion and ambition and research to spare. Too bad Jarecki didn't take a somewhat fresher, more balanced approach in making his case.