“Filmmaker Michael Moore’s brilliant and uplifting new documentary, “Sicko,” deals with the failings of the U.S. healthcare system, both real and perceived. But this time around, the controversial documentarian seems to be letting the subject matter do the talking, and in the process shows a new maturity.”
I have had, an evolution, on my stance about Michael Moore. I’ve never seen “Bowling For Columbine”, and I was dissuaded when it first came out to ever watch it by most of my friends at the time. I was in High School when Columbine happened, I remember the “weird kids” at my school going to the the principal and counselor’s offices, I remember my school hiring a security guard.
I did not go to a violent school. Just a normal urban high school in a smaller to midsized Heartland city in Southern Indiana. We’re known for basketball, not domestic violence, instabilities or great poverty. We were just as average as any school. When Columbine happened, a wave of “It can happen here” spread across the administrations and parents of the country that dealt with schools just like ours. The student body was split. Half thought Columbine was isolated and measures taken in our own school were extreme. The other half felt the random and violent actions of Columbine validated upped security in their own school and classrooms.
In the middle of all this was “Bowling For Columbine”. I never saw it because it was discovered that Michael Moore had orchestrated scenes in the movie, and manipulated edits to convey very specific viewpoints. I was a film geek then. Still am. It was abhorrent to me that a filmmaker would claim to make a documentary only to manipulate the footage. That was not “fair and balanced”.
I saw Fahrenheit 9/11 in theaters when it came out. I considered that movie a great failure. If one wanted to bring focus on the failures of the 2000 election, presidential actions taken on September 11th, and the instigation of war in Iraq you don’t have to look very far, and you don’t need to deal with the Saudi Royal family to do it either. Fahrenheit 9/11 missed the point. And so did Michael Moore, he had fallen into punditry and blind attacks on the conservative right. He had become a liberal Sean Hannity. Fuck him for that.
Much later I saw Rodger and Me. Then I got it. This was good in your face documentary work where the story spoke for itself, and Michael Moore had a brilliant ability to hang onto the right people like a god damned steel trap. Rodger and Me is great. I can only hope that “Sicko” does the same and brings Mr. Moore back into the realm of credible and valuable documentary work. He has been absent from it for quite a while, and it would be nice if he wasn’t such a liberal embarrassment.
I have not seen “Sicko” but if Fox News will give it a positive review, well, I’m willing to admit that I’ll give the man another chance. Even De Niro has made bad movies, and I still love his acting in the good ones. It will be good for all if Mr. Moore comes back into rationality and avoids blind punditry in attacking opposing views.
~C
Share & Save: |
 |
Share |  |
Related Posts on PBH |
I saw Michael Moore’s TV show once, it was pretty interesting in that he’s incredibly sensationalistic, which I guess has it’s good points. That Penn and Teller show Bullshit is another show that likes to just show one side. I don’t think there is much in this world that is that simple.
That being said the buzz around Sicko is such that I think I would like to see it.
I am also not a big fan of the show Bullshit. I’ve seen a few episodes and was not excited about the one-sided inflammatory shit that they ran. I really hate when the show lets Penn do a running voice over with snide comments on top of interviews. It’s a cowardly way to deliver an argument over an issue.
Michael Moore needs to do his own version of fast food nation, where he restricts his caloric intake to 1000 calories a day. That, I’ll watch. But seriously, to me Moore embodies the dotty self-important liberal who just whines and complains about everything. And he’s also fat, which compounds his negative qualities.
I don’t really understand why Penn and Teller have a TV show either. Don’t they do MAGIC TRICKS? How does that make them qualified to do a political show? Were Charlie Sheen and Rosie O’Donnell unavailable to spew their opinions??
Good post. I will say that, while his editing tactics are shady, Michael Moore tells no fairy tails about balance. I’ll say also that he did some good work with “The Awful Truth” even if he did keep with his habit of sensationalism. I like this one http://youtube.com/watch?v=IJwI66ifjPc
My fiance, Sara, is really pissed of that Michael Moore is the defacto high profile voice for liberal causes. He is too divisive on almost everything he does. I think he latches onto the right subject matter, but his presentation of material has a lot of room for improvement.
Sara has always wanted Al Franken to be the guy that Liberals turn to for a major pop culture voice. He’s smart, funny, and most important, he’s relaxed. He doesn’t get too extreme while stressing the right points.
I’m not sure if he’s making a smart choice running for senate, that’s for the voters, but his books on Fox News are great, and he’s got a real sense of how to explain things.
I saw a documentary about political divisiveness in Utah, Michael Moore spoke at a conservative college, and the footage was mixed with footage of when Sean Hannity spoke at the same place, the two use a lot of fascist style speaking methods. Such as creating a universal faceless enemy (conservatives, liberals, ect…) they both called out specific people in the audience of the opposing party and made them look bad by catching them unprepared to speak in front of an arena audience.
It was sad to see, nothing was there that stimulated real debate, just a bunch of punditry shit. Fuck Michael Moore, fuck him up his dirty ass, but if his documentary is good, I’ll watch it.
Michael Moore is a pretty annoying person which I don’t think is lost on most people. Plus, he looks like a gigantic virgin.
hahaha, yes.