Is 'An American Carol' a Parody or a Right-Wing Diatribe?
Filed under: Comedy, Celebrities and Controversy, Politics, Trailers and Clips
You may have heard that spoof veteran David Zucker's newest project, An American Carol, is a takedown of Michael Moore. You can now have a look at the trailer, online at Yahoo!. And then you can riddle me this: Does An American Carol look like a clever parody of Moore's documentaries, or just a partisan attack on the filmmaker? Or, put another way, is the clip of Bill O'Reilly slapping around Kevin Farley's "Michael Malone" a commentary on the rivalry between the two, or right-wing wish fulfillment? One thing to note before answering is that O'Reilly appears in the film himself, while Moore does not.Moore is obviously fair game; I've enjoyed his films, and sympathize with (some of) his politics, but I'd eagerly watch a skillful spoof of the pudgy, faux-working-class provocateur. I think parts of the trailer are pretty funny ("Here I am on the island paradise Cuba!"). But if the point is just to pile on the guy, with a rah-rah patriotic, stop-hating-America message at the end, then I'm significantly less interested.
The thing is, the trailer really doesn't make clear what's going on. On one hand, prominent conservatives like O'Reilly and James Woods appear to deliver literal and figurative blows. On the other, "Michael Malone" gets accused of being a slaveowner, which sounds more like a parody of conservative attacks on Moore than of Moore himself. And is Trace Adkins poking fun at his image here, or is he for real?
We know that Zucker is himself conservative, and that the movie is political -- which is fine. But is it political in an incisive, worthwhile way, or in the brainless beatdown mode of Ann Coulter et al? What do you think?
Tom Cruise and J.J. Abrams Reunite for 'Mission Impossible 4'
'Big Top Pee-Wee': The Original Benicio Del Toro Wolfman
Spin-ematical: New on DVD and Blu-ray for 2/9
Watch This: Brilliant Oscar-Nominated Short 'Logorama'
Chris Nolan to Lead 'Superman' Reboot!?
_thumbnail.jpg)
_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 6)
8-19-2008 @ 3:14PM
crabbie said...
Not even a word about the death of Manny Farber? I guess you're all too busy masturbating to your Megan Fox pictures. I'll help you out:
http://crabbieshollywood.blogspot.com/2008/08/farber-dead.html
Reply
9-23-2008 @ 9:35PM
Keith said...
I love it. The trailer is great. I hope the rest of the movie is just as funny. I have not gone to a movie in ten years but i will see this one. common sense is back. yea
9-23-2008 @ 9:50PM
Keith said...
Who is Manny Farber?
8-19-2008 @ 3:48PM
Commodore said...
Worthwhile is a matter of opinion, and certainly has never been a criterion for quality in comedies with decidedly liberal bents that are themselves in "brainless beatdown mode" i.e. Harold and Kumar Escape from Gitmo. Need I remind readers of the innumerable cinematic sucker punches President Bush has taken, or Limbaugh, or the United State Military?
But since this film is conservative, critics are already looking to conform it to a different standard. This is not surprising, and I think is probably one of the points of the film itself.
Reply
8-19-2008 @ 4:02PM
Jonathan Kuhn said...
This looks to be along the same lines as Epic Movie.
It's funny to me that Kelsey Grammer and Dennis Hopper are in another political film together.
Reply
9-27-2008 @ 11:31PM
ron said...
Those films don't accuse conservatives of hating America. Liberals don't hate america just because they disagree with you. This film accuses that they do. Also, go ahead and waste money on a film that agrees with you, but will probably suck like all of the recent budget parody movies.
8-19-2008 @ 5:35PM
KJ said...
I'm sure this will be just as unbiased as Oliver Stone's "W" or any of Moore's own films. Or for that matter any of the large number of anti-war films of late that have completely tanked at the box office. It's a risk to make a purely partisan movie, and several liberal films have failed miserably recently. It'll be interesting to see if the conservatives can do any better.
Reply
8-19-2008 @ 6:11PM
StanleyNickels said...
It just looks bad, regardless of it's political bent.
Reply
9-26-2008 @ 7:40PM
gotrhythm said...
Yeah, kinda like you lefties think Sarah Palin was a bad choice.
8-19-2008 @ 7:11PM
Philip said...
The media can't decide if George W is the biggest idiot to ever be President, or a clever mastermind who spies on the American public and uses his considerable wits to perpetrate complex ploys on the world.
The reception this movie receives from the media will interest me.
Reply
8-20-2008 @ 1:32AM
Rose said...
The far left has had sacred cow status in Hollywood for too long, it will be a good laugh to watch Moore et al get skewered. Extremists are comedy gold. I look forward to seeing the film. I'm curious about the critical response though -- I wonder whether film critics give bad reviews based on politics. I hope not.
Reply
10-23-2008 @ 7:03PM
tommy boy said...
Rose,
I know the film critics, mostly liberal were anxious t0
lambaste the film, which is why they were mad about
not being able to preview in advance.
Let the people decide. from what I have seen with my own eyes
it looks funny.
8-20-2008 @ 9:54AM
John R said...
"or in the brainless beatdown mode of Ann Coulter et al?"
bingo
Reply
8-21-2008 @ 5:33PM
Boat said...
I think this looks fantastic. Its could to see some un-leftist political shots out there. I think it is indeed a right wing movie but that's ok, Moore has it coming. The guy is a baffoon.
I love Zucker and I think the most important note to point out is how natural Farley looks so far as a lead.
Reply
9-25-2008 @ 2:27AM
Ross said...
The Right wing proving yet again it can't do good political humor. Anybody remember Fox's, Half-Hour Comedy Hour? Oops it lasted about a half hour before it was canceled for being a lame duck on the most right wing media center in the world.
Now don't get me wrong, though I believe in his messages and issues, I find Moore's over the top self-righteousness and smug attitude as annoying as the next person, but just from the previews it's obvious that the film makers interpret Moore's, most often overt, use of sarcasm and exaggeration as being real ideas. For example in the trailer the Moore character says something along the line of let's get rid of the fourth of July. If Moore said something like that it would be to punctuate the fact that it's a holiday celebrating not only independence but everything that came with it. Freedom of Religion (Aren't there a large number of Neo-cons who want to establish some form of Christianity as a state religion?), No Taxation without representation (Does the fact that I know my where my taxes are going change the fact that I am outraged by what I know? No), The Bill of Rights (Please don't make me explain all of the sins against that sacred American document). These film makers would simply try to appeal to the simple natures of those who would find this funny that Moore is crass enough to espouse in a non-absurdest fashion doing away with something so proudly American.
Truth in jest. It's the underlying truth not the exaggeration that makes something funny. The film makers here seem to think humor comes from a manipulative formula. Take the sarcastic and satirical statements of Moore distilled into simple anti-American statements treated as truth and then exaggerated and pass it off as humor.
Uh...sorry but I do go on...forget that I need to keep things simple for Right wingers.
Moore, Pompous, but right 80% of the time.
Neo-cons evil bastards distracting you with religion and abortion while they rape the world.
Be proud you GOOD 'mericans!
10-02-2008 @ 6:07PM
JimR said...
Actually replying to previous reply, who said "Aren't there a large number of Neo-cons who want to establish some form of Christianity as a state religion?"
You're kidding, right? Many think the term neocon is code for Jew. First neocons were Jewish, look it up. But even if that wasn't true, conservatives don't want to establish a state religion, that is a liberal fear and a lie. But many do want to protect the historical fact that religious belief was strong and a factor in the founding of this nation.
8-23-2008 @ 6:18PM
Steve said...
It's actually an interpretation of Dicken's "A Christmas Carol"
Substitute Independence Day for Christmas,
Michael Moore for Ebenezer Scrooge,
John F Kennedy for Marley,
George S Patton, George Washington, and the Angel of Death for the three spirits
This movie isn't really aimed at Moore, he's just the main vehicle. So it's not a parody of his work, it is an interpretation of his attitudes and compares them with those of Ebeneezer Scrooge.
Reply
8-24-2008 @ 4:10PM
Mike R said...
Funny somebody that is upset with our government and they way they are running the country makes them a Scrooge, that needs to be enlightened by the likes of Billy O. I love Zucker and I will see the film and I am sure I will laugh if I agree with the politics or not.
Reply
8-26-2008 @ 2:31AM
Lance said...
So let me get this straight...you love films of Moore's, but won't be interested in one of another point of view (even if done by satire-stupid-humor)...? You don't consider his 9/11 film an attack on the right? ....wow lol
Reply
8-27-2008 @ 1:14PM
bRain said...
A bad omen: Zucker appears to blurb HIMSELF in the trailer. Zucker forfeited the right to call himself "the master of movie satire" after he made "Rat Race."
This movie has the potential to be funny but it also looks like a lot of jingoistic pandering. (The fact that O'Reilly's in it is also a bad omen.) For truly post-partisan satire of the Hollywood left, try Trey Parker and Matt Stone.
Reply