Things are heating up as conventions draw near – this time it’s in the box office. Director Michael Moore’s startling documentary, “Fahrenheit 9/11,” not only is ranked as the highest grossing documentary in history, but is fueling debates on both sides of the party lines.

And why is this drawing so much attention?

Well, let’s begin with the startling realization that real footage was used. Segments and sound bites from various press events are spliced together by Moore in a way to achieve a certain effect, but each clip does mark a true incident in time.

The film begins with the infamous election in 2000, where George W. Bush in fact was appointed and not elected to the presidency. Moore shows the audience according to his record of events, whether viewers believe them afterwards or not.

Or, we can jump to the live broadcast from the main news affiliates as they declared one-by-one Al Gore as the winner in Florida. They later had to apologize to the nation as the election enters the land of mass confusion. “Fahrenheit” brings up logical points about news coverage and how the press, especially on television, seems to have lost their sense of objectivity.

For example, Moore puts together a portion of the film that jumps from news anchor to news anchor, including Dan Rather who spoke about the war in Iraq and how they “fully support their country.”

That, to some, isn’t very objective, especially for one of the main newscasters in history.

Smaller bits of press coverage and also political issues like that, those that pique interest and raise eyebrows, fill in the gaps in “Fahrenheit.”

The movie progresses to September 11, showing video that Americans are all too familiar with, but also contrasting that with information of Bush knowing about the aforementioned terrorist attack. This segment of the movie is extremely dark yet thought-provoking, setting the mood for a politically- heated satire that serves some humor but causes viewers to re-evaluate their government.

From Bush’s election, Moore follows the Texan along the years of his presidency, exposing many of the mishaps and more serious “bumps in the road” that have been hidden from the public. This perspective, though revealing, turned some away from the film.

“[The movie] was exactly what I expected,” said Alison Brown, a student at the University of Michigan and an employee at the Northeastern Bookstore. “I’m pretty liberal but I think [Moore] took things out of context to make it a popular movie.”

Some of the points made in the film might have gone too far, poking fun at the president in circumstances that others may have acted similarly in. Still, the film comes at a crucial time in the campaign process, whether or not it is supposed to be a strategic ploy against Bush.

Timing is also key since the documentary focuses heavily on the conflict in Iraq. Moore added a heart-wrenching testimony from a mother of a soldier, Lila Lipscomb, leaving many audience members quiet.

Moore went from Lipscomb’s initial extreme pride and positive outlook on her son being in the service to a scene at the end that was undeniably the most sobering part of the film. After Lipscomb receives news about her son’s death, she makes a trip to the Capitol, a part of the movie that puts the Iraqi war into more of a personal context.

Viewers cannot deny the validity of her account, showing Moore’s ability to work outside of humor and satire and instead, capture raw emotion.

While “Fahrenheit” may appeal to some more than others, the film nonetheless achieved its main objective — to start people talking.