Tags
"The Fog of War", "The Unknown Known", documentary films, Donald Rumsfeld, Errol Morris, Robert McNamara
Oscar winning documentary filmmaker Errol Morris (The Fog of War, The Thin Blue Line) has made a documentary focusing on Donald Rumsfeld’s life in government, largely, though not exclusively, on his role as Secretary of Defense in the George W. Bush administration.
(Morris’ The Fog of War: Eleven Lessons from the Life of Robert S. McNamara, won an Academy Award as Best Documentary in 2003. I did not see it, but by many accounts it was an insightful, powerful film in which Morris was able to draw out McNamara about his role in the Vietnam War. One reviewer, Fred Kaplan, The Lies of The Fog of War, praised Morris for his ability to capture McNamara’s introspection, However, Kaplan also writes about the many “instances of McNamara’s mendacity” in that documentary.)
Along with Ellen and several friends, last night we saw a pre-release of Morris’ new film, The Unknown Known. If you plan to see this documentary, soon to be released nationwide, stop reading now as there are spoilers in what follows.
Spoilers………………Spoilers……………..Spoilers……………Spoilers
This film largely consists of Errol Morris interviewing Donald Rumsfeld for a period of 100 minutes. The audience never sees Morris and only hears his voice. Interspersed throughout are pictures of memos written over a six year period by the defense secretary — “snowflakes,” Rumsfeld calls them. There are also file photos and video from various times and activities in Rumsfeld’s public life and a musical score that adds to the film.
For those of us who lived through this period of our history, there is much that is familiar, particularly the press conferences and Rumsfeld’s public appearances. Personally, I found this man arrogant then and arrogant now. Although he is less abrasive in these interviews than he was during his press appearances while in office, he rarely seems genuinely reflective and seeks to ‘spin’ and to ‘charm’ Morris with words (“known unknowns,” “known knowns,” “unknown knows,” etc.).
And Morris lets Rumsfeld get away with not truly taking ownership for his and the Bush administrations decisions and actions. Particularly galling to me was Rumsfeld denial that there was any attempt on their part to equate the events of 9/11 with the situation in Iraq and with Saddam Hussein. Morris, tho he seems incredulous about this, lets him get away with this and other lies.
When Morris produces evidence from memos written by Rumsfeld that contradicts something Rumsfeld has just said, the secretary just smiles, nods his head, and sometimes even agrees. Morris continually lets him off the hook.
If this were a boxing or wrestling match, Rumsfeld seems to comes out on top.
But as a group of us discussed the movie following its screening and then continued our discussion at dinner, a disagreement emerged. Several people were angry at Rumsfeld — for his mendacity, for his unwillingness to look honestly at himself and his actions, and for a continuation of his arrogance — and at Morris – – for his allowing Rumsfeld to do those things.
Others said they thought Morris was intentionally letting Rumsfeld ‘hang’ himself, that by not arguing nor confronting him more openly, Morris was letting “Rumsfeld be Rumsfeld” with the result being that the audience was able to see Rumsfeld for what he was and what he continues to be.
I agree with both views, except I’m not sure that Morris was purposefully allowing Rumsfeld to spin him. Rather, I think that despite Morris’ questions, despite his use of memos, despite his editing of the documentary, and despite his decision(s) not to confront him more openly, Rumsfeld largely could not hide who he was and who he is.
If you are reading this after having seen the film, please weigh in on these views and add your own.
____________________________________________________________
Note: Three of the films we saw in our Sunday morning Cinema Club are now ‘out’ and available. You can see mini-reviews of these by clicking on the following links. I rated them all between four and five stars: The Lunchbox****, Particle Fever*****, and Tim’s Vermeer****1/2.
Bob T said:
Yes, I am on both sides of that argument also! It was clear from the film that Rumsfeld thinks he is very clever and charming. He is also very impressed with what he probably considers his “philosophical bent.” To the extent that we can try to tie this droll fellow who is so enchanted with words to the architect of a war that inflicted so much death, destruction, and disorientation, I feel that Morris is letting him indict himself.
I have to think Morris may have been every bit as angry at Rumsfeld, and every bit as struck by the bizarre, even macabre spectacle of having matters of such import discussed in this manner, as many of us were. As an artist he had to choose his approach, and perhaps he chose a more artistically respectable and even more convincing path over a more didactic or outraged presentation.
But I still feel the outrage and I feel the presentation downplayed what I see as the conniving and devious side of Donald Rumsfeld, allowing him to play the part of a college professor having fun entertaining his students.
Richard said:
Well said Bob.
Have you ever considered writing reviews?
Tim Malieckal said:
Caught the preview for this at the cinema last week, and was surprised at how viscerally angry I grew in my seat. Part of it had to do with Rumsfeld, who I consider a war criminal; part of it was an upsurge of emotion at being forced to relive those awful eight years.
But interestingly, a lot of my disgust had to do with Morris. I had seen ‘Fog of War’ at Trinity College’s Cinestudio theater years ago, and was quite charmed by it. Disclosure: Morris played me. I was led by the nose, giggling and nodding my head appreciatively at the way the director humanized and made his subject seem so funny. It was only afterwards (genuinely impressed by McNamara’s ‘performance’) that I did some research on the man. Being born in 1974, I had little understanding of the role he played in the Vietnam war.
So I felt pretty stupid, to say the least. And here we go again, this time with Rumsfeld, exact same approach, barely tut-tutting at Rumsfeld’s (inevitable) lies and letting him look into the camera with a ‘I got away with it, screw you, nobody held me to account’ grin.
I noticed in the preview the way Morris used ‘snowflakes’ visually during the credits. Soft, white, benign, silently floating from on high. I find that decision to be morally indefensible. Lest we forget, the most famous of these snowflakes was the one encouraging torture as an acceptable – expected? – practice at Abu Ghraib.
The title: Rumsfeld’s famous ‘known knows, unknown knowns, unknown unknowns’. This snatch of absolute nonsense perfectly encapsulates the Rumsfeld approach to other people. And yet the media ate it up, never challenged him, let it go. If I learned one thing from the man, it’s this: smile, lie, and express unapologetic disdain for a critic, and they will go away.
Morris seems to be a talented one-trick pony who is available for hire to ‘humanize’ awful human beings like Donald Rumsfeld. I had a similar realization about Michael Haneke: When I saw ‘Piano Teacher’, I was in awe. Then I saw ‘Cache’, and I felt sick. By the time ‘Funny Games’ rolled around, I realized that the director has one element of style: violence. I stand foursquare against piracy, but I’ll torrent this film if I see it. I can’t bring myself to put any money in Morris’ pocket, and in doing so, tacitly approve of Donald Rumsfeld.
How does that old chestnut from the Bush Regime years go again? ‘Fool me once’ . . .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKgPY1adc0A
Bill Plitt said:
Good morning, Richard.
I have not much to add to the conversation that you, Bob and Tim have already had.
As I said the night of the pre-screening, I felt like Rumsfeld indicted himself by not directly owning up to the atrocities of the war and his major role in it. His arrogance of power was nauseating and his playfulness irritating. It did remind me of the same reactions I had after seeing Morris’s “Fog of War”.
Having recently attended The “National Summit Conference on the Re-examinating of U.S Policy Toward Israel” at the National Press Club and heard former colonels, generals and CIA officials disclose what the secret planning panels which were going on behind the scenes before “Shock and Awe”, the movie made me fear even more a world which is growing less democratic and more autocratic, less open and more secretive.
I am grateful that the more-transparency-in-government movement, like the Sunlight Foundation is promoting, is alive and well. It gives me hope that maybe we won’t have to wait until after these “government servants” leave office to flaunt their pernicious behavior at great expense to our financial and human resources as well as to the future of our grandchildren. We might be able to oust the scoundrels before they do harm, and not witness their greed years later.
B.