{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021111111111111112, 'fraction_numerical': 0.013333333333333334, 'mean_word_length': 5.825757575757576, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Separated at Birth: Argument by Irony in Hearts and Minds and Fahrenheit 9/11

Political documentaries Hearts and Minds and Fahrenheit 9/11 were made three decades apart and stand as cultural markers of their times. The films share remarkable similarities and equally important differences. Hearts and Minds and Fahrenheit 9/11 include many similar iconic images of antiwar rhetoric, including grieving parents, profiteering businessmen, dissembling politicians, and wounded warriors. They have similar distribution histories. Conceptually, both films construct cinematic argument through an intricate succession of incongruous, contradictory, and ultimately ironic words and images. This article explores argument by irony as exemplified by Hearts and Minds and Fahrenheit 9/11, and discusses their dissimilarities as manifestations of the radically differentiated media environments of their times.