Michael Jackson's This is It

I could go on and on and about who MJ was to me. I really could, but I will not do it. I just want to say that MJ is the man behind the music that brings my entire family together. Musically the 6 of us do not agree on anything fully except MJ. That is who he is to me.

Gearing up for a 50 show extravaganza in London, the final few months of Michael Jackson's life were spent in Los Angeles rehearsing and luckily a bunch of cameras were there to capture the events. Make no mistake, though, this is essentially a concert film. It is not a hard hitting behind the scenes documentary or a study on the man behind the music, it is a concert film first and foremost. There are behind the scene moments and a few glimpses into who MJ was, but mostly this is about the music. Each song has an accompanying story, or process, whether it is work on the green scene, or MJ trying to figure out tempos, or just dances, but each number takes up a good chunk of time and then we are rewarded with a rehearsal performance of each number, except Thriller which actually looks kind of finished because it was able to be done in Post Production with the would be 3D effects. The cameras are not very invasive, but that may be because MJ was aware they were there and he does not give anything away.

The movie shows MJ to be in good shape, with swift moving feet, flexible limbs and having a deep sense of passion that music and that his show can fuel the fire to change the world. He is just as soft spoken on stage as we see off stage, which is disarming because the best always have a swagger. Michael Jordan, Tom Brady, Alex Rodriguez, Tiger Woods. These guys all have swagger and they all carry themselves with it. Jackson does not, at least not until the music hits. He is a man who was born to perform and he is phenomenal even at 75%. Of course, that is what makes someone the best, when their 75% is better than most people's 100%. Jackson is surrounded by dancers who are all in their 20s, all shirtless and with ripped bodies and sick dance moves, but it is still Jackson we watch and it is still Jackson they wish they were. Actually some of my favorite stuff in the film is watching the dancers. The movie opens on the dancers talking about the chance to be on stage with Michael and then in many moments we get reactions from these dancers as they just stand and watch Michael move or sing and it is obvious this is a dream come true.

The concert footage is fun, yes. It is wonderful to watch Michal pop, lock, glide, and smoothly hit every move and it is fun to listen to him softly croon the songs as he converses his voice, but I was much more interested in the other stuff. I loved listening to Michael talk about holding notes, or waiting an extra beat for the audience. MJ seems to know exactly how to work a crowd into a frenzy and he is the master of his own show. My absolute favorite moment in this movie is watching MJ try and tell his conductor about the pacing for "The Way you make me feel." MJ is meticulous about what he wants and it shows MJ for being kind of mean and a bit of a perfectionist, but also as someone who understands what he wants. He says he wants it to start like "you are just getting out of bed." Then he takes the conductor through a series of tempos and vocalizing about what it is all supposed to sound like and how certain key changes need to hit at this exact moment. Then, when we see that song performed, we get it. We understand why MJ is the best and why he sold out 50 shows in London as quickly as he did.

People older than me had Elvis and the Beatles. I had MJ. MJ was a cultural icon, whose music videos were premiered on prime time because they were events. This concert would have been an event, with MJ CGIed in classic black and white movies and having a shoot out with Bogart, or how Thriller transformed into 3D or all the fireworks, and lights and sounds ans guitars. MJ perfected the idea of "Go Big or Go Home." This concert film has its hits and misses and maybe it was quickly put together to make some money off of the man, but don't the fans deserve to see what it could have been like? Watching the Thriller dance on a stage does not get old and watching MJ run, leap and fly across the stage is an absolute joy because you know that is the only place where he felt in control and had any idea of who he was. I do not want to romanticize the man because I did not know him, but I know, as a fan, I loved being able to see this.

My guess is that if MJ had lived, we would have got a concert film and a behind the scenes documentary, but instead we get this hybrid thing that does not really delve deep enough into either side. Michael never performs full out vocally and he marks much of the dancing, but his attitude is right. We see the twinkle in his eye when he sees something he likes and we see a little bit of the personality and sense of humor behind the most curious person in pop culture. The interviews with musicians, dancers and collaborators never tell me enough, but they provide some nice moments and the movie shows that MJ was not afraid to let someone else shine as his absolutely sexy 24 yr old guitarist owns the stage with her confidence and axe grinding during "Black or White."

This is It is a contrived bit of sentimentality towards Michael Jackson created by Kenny Ortega who obviously loved his time with MJ. However contrived it may be though, it is also a whole hell of a lot of fun. I wanted to sing and dance my way through the whole experience. My feet and hands were tapping constantly and I had a smile on my face throughout the movie because of the music and dancing and the pure joy MJ got from doing both of them. He was a man completely unknowable which in this day and age feels so strange and this movie will not give us much of a better idea of who he was, but at least we get to see what made him happy and we get to witness a passion for performing and that is always fun for me.

Final Grade: B+

Capitalism: A Love Story

Michael Moore...Blahblahblah (that blahblahblah incorporates everything you know and hear about the man). Onto the review!

In a world (go back and say that with EPIC voice) where people are losing their jobs, their houses and their sanity, one man will stand up and give voice to the voiceless and that man is Michael Moore. He of gun control wanting, Bush hating and free health care advocating fame, is back and fatter than ever. With his hushed faux sincerity, ugly baseball cap and constant prying for the truth, Moore returns to find out what happened to the United State of America. The short answer, for Moore is Capitalism. Capitalism happened to America and because of it, the rich got richer and the poor got poorer. Moore is out to examine the effects of Capitalism, as well as the history of it. He recalls a time when Ronald Regan came through and changed business. He recalls when Americans stopped being able to pay for the things they needed with the money they earned and had to start relying on credit cards. He condemns every single secretary of treasury of the last 5 presidents for helping cause this down turn. And he does it all with that typical Michael Moore innocent voice and doughy frame.

Moore's movies are typically only as good as his stunts. And he has always had good stunts. This movie is no different. Here he goes out to all the big banks in an attempt to get back the bailout money to give back to the people. He wants to make a citizen's arrest of all the CEOs of major banking companies and before the final credits he goes as far as to wrap crime scene tape around every big banking firm's building. It is an audacious, hilarious and fruitless stunt, but he makes his point- the American people were robbed! The story leading up to the bailout might be the most interesting in the movie as Moore interviews members of the Senate to find out how the deal got done in backrooms witrh handshakes and under the table dealings. He cuts this with footage of outraged senators and compliant senators in senate hearings about the potential bailout. It is an interesting piece of Government and Moore is not afraid of worrying about boring people by showing it all.

In this movie, more so than the last two, I think, Moore has found good human stories. he has found stories of people with whom we can sympathize. He has also found a pretty shocking human story, in my opinion. He discovers that many big businesses take out life insurance on employees where they are the benefactor, so if an employee dies, the company can make money. One woman lost her husband to cancer and his place of employment made 1.5 million dollars off of the family's grief. This is a remarkably disgusting business practice and points to the greed of the CEOs in a Capitalist economy. One can argue the legal parameters and of course, it turns out it is legal, but what about the question of morals? At what point does money stop being the important factor?

I think that is Moore's major point in this movie: At what point does money stop being the most important thing in life? Moore puts all of the blame under this blanket of Capitalism and he makes some very convincing, entertaining and thought provoking points, but at one point does someone just factor in individual greed? Sure, Capitalism breeds a kind of greed, but don't aren't some people just greedy on their own? Moore's attempt at condemning the institution and some of the people who are behind the institution is admirable, but I think his scope is too narrow. He shows us a few examples of how well businesses can run when they are run as a democracy and how when everyone is happy, everyone makes more money, so he kind of covers his bases, but again, individual greed is inherent in some.

I do think this is Moore's second most effective movie (After Bowling for Columbine) mostly because of one story in particular. If you followed the news in the weeks before and after the election, you might remember a group of blue collar workers who had their plant shut down and were not paid because Bank of America refused to give the bosses credit to pay the employees at the end. These employees had a shut in at their former place of employment and it caught national attention. Obama applauded their efforts and the whole city rallied around this group of people, bringing them food and cheering them on. Because of the bailout, BofA could afford to give these people their just due, but they were refusing, and eventually the people had their say and BofA caved. In a sequence that brought tears to my eyes, Moore perfectly captures the human spirit to endure and persevere.

Capitalism: A Love Story mixes depressing images of run down houses with funny animated sequences. It opens with comparing us to ancient Rome and then from there Michael Moore does his Michael Moore thing. He is not going to convert any people as people know what to expect from him, but he has created an interesting documentary rich with human stories about how we, the under represented can rise up and fight back. Moore ends his movie with a call to action and that is what is required. People have to fight back and not accept the lot they have been given. It is a surprisingly humanistic approach, for a rich film maker to take, but that is what makes Michael Moore so unique. He lives in excess, but he preaches to the little guy and in this case, I hope the little guys listen.

Final Grade: A-

Every Little Step (spoilers, I guess)

On the cast recording of Bye bye Birdie I have, there is a bonus track of Charles Strause (The composer) doing "Put on a Happy Face" live and before he sings it he tells the story of how that song was almost cut. The song was originally sung right towards the end of act 1 with Albert singing it as he is preparing for the Ed Sullivan show. No one responded well to the song and it was only at the encouragement of Strause's wife to move the song that it worked. There are two moments very much like that in Every Little Step, a documentary about the casting process of 2006's revival of A Chorus Line.

Blending interviews, auditions, footage from the original show and audio from the famous night that birthed the show, Every Little Step is attempting to condense about 2.5 hrs worth of movie into a little under 90 minutes, leaving much to be desired. The audience gets the history of the show, complete with a few great anecdotes, which are probably the strongest aspects of the film. Obviously Michael Bennett is not around to tell this story, but the directors of the documentary have put together all of the people who were around him while he was putting together the show and they create a very vivid picture of what it was like trying to get A Chorus Line on Broadway.

However, the movie is going to live or die with the audition process and the people who are auditioning. If you know the revival there will not be much suspense in the show, in fact, the movie does not do a very good job of giving us any real suspense or drama. We are introduced to a young beautiful girl named Jessica, and I guess she is meant to be the girl we connect to, but the movie is trying to give us so many small stories on so many different girls that Jessica gets lost, which is too bad because her journey is by far the most interesting of any of the cast. Jessica is the least likely to get cast in one of the lead roles and when she gets it, we do not even really get to see her elation at it. We see Jessica talking to her family about it, but not her face when she got the call. It is a big miscue by the directors. We do get to see plenty of those great moments of "I can't believe I got the job" but Jessica is the girl we were supposed to be rooting for and she was the underdog. She went to the last audition thinking she was just being looked as an understudy and she stole the role and we did not get to see that!

We do get a nice intimate peek in on how Broadway musical auditions happen and that is nice for those of us who love musical theater, but I am not sure how interesting the whole process is for people who do not already have a love for the genre. The 3 callback days being spaced out every four months was interesting and provided the only real drama because the creative team had two girls they loved at the second call backs, but in the final call back the two girls did not do it the same way and when given the shot to do it again, both girls were freaking out trying to remember what they did nearly 8 months earlier. It seems a bit tedious to try and ask for the exact same thing these girls did 8 months ago, but I guess that is the way it is done.

I wanted to really feel like I was living inside the experience all of these actors were having and I wanted to feel the highs and the lows, but save for one audition (Jason Tam for Paul) I did not emotionally connect to any of the auditionees. I did have a nice response to the father of one of the women auditioning and I feel the directors of this film got lucky by having him to include. There was just nothing grabbing me and I was wondering if this really was worthy of a big screen release, when it felt more like a PBS special. Even documentaries need to have drama and conflict and this movie just does not have either one of them. I understand that the directors have to work with the footage they have, but surely they could have created a better sense of drama with the actors and their stories of the actors' lives. Instead, the 90 minutes are full of semi interesting stories and kind of interesting people and a whole lot of leotards and one girl named Nikki with amazing abs.

Final Grade: D

Religulous

There was a span of about 5 years where Bill Maher and his show, Politically Incorrect, was appointment television for me. I thought that man was hilarious, polarizing, charismatic and asked interesting and thought provoking questions. Then, the show was cancelled and I lost my interest in the man. I think it was two years later when I stumbled on a stand up special of his and after about 3 minutes concluded he had lost it. Nothing was easier at the time than jokes about Priests and young boys, but the entire section I saw was full of those easy jokes. My other point of view going into this movie, is known to those who know me, but for anyone justs tumbling onto this review blog, I should fully disclose that I grew up Mormon (I no longer affiliate with it) and religion has long been an interest of mine.

As far as documentaries go this is a pretty straight forward one. Bill Maher hates religion and interviews people to find out why people buy into it. He talks to Christians, Muslims and Jews. He talks to a Catholic Cardinal, ex-Mormons, Ex-Jews for Jesus, Muslim leaders, a Muslim rapper, Jewish Rabbis and even a guy who believes he is the second coming of Jesus Christ. He talks to black ministers, reformed Gays, Gay Muslims, scientists and a guy who plays Jesus in a reenactment at the Jesus version of Disneyland. He also talks to random people on the street and gets kicked out of the Vatican and The Mormon Temple Square. Maher is a funny interviewer although very combative at times and yes, he is out to trick his interview subjects.

Religulous plays like Borat crossed with Michael Moore movies. Maher attacks easy marks like Borat and incorporates music, cartoons, subtitles and clips from existing sources to make his point in the way Moore does. If you go back and see my Borat review, or have had discussions with me about Borat, you would know, my biggest issue with the movie, aside from not being funny in any way, is that Borat attacked easy targets. We all knew that homophobia exists in the south and that frat boys are misogynistic. When Maher opened this movie talking to a group of Christian Truckers, I thought, "Oh great, here we go again." The fundamental issue with intelligent conversation or debate on religion is that religion is not based in intelligence. That is not to say that only idiots subscribe to religion, it is saying that people who have faith, are led by their faith and not facts trying to prove or not prove the existence of God. It is easy for Maher to make people who have faith look stupid and it is easy for "I have faith" to be a cop-out in a debate. This presents a problem for Maher's interview tactics. He does land some nice punches and he gets people to say stupid things like a U.S Senator saying "You don't have to takes an I.Q test to be a senator."

What Maher should have focused more energy on is the hypocrisy of the commercialization of religion. When he goes there he scores great laughs and great points. He confronts a minister who wears $2,000.00 dollar suits, has lizard skin boots and thousands of dollars worth of bling and wonders if Jesus would be happy about it. The highlight of the movie was the Catholic Cardinal who admitted he hated the excess of the Vatican. The guy was funny, honest and humble. He seemed to "get" his faith in a way so many do not. Maher does contradict himself in one moment though, that bugged me. Maher spends a lot of the movie trying to convince Christians that the bible is a dated book, that it contains things that no longer apply and that to believe 100% something from a book written so long ago maybe is not the best way to go. He makes the point "What else from those ages do we still use?" Well, nothing really. However, when a Muslim woman tells him that she believe the violence spouted by Muhammad was meant only for the days of Muhammad, Maher attacks her by saying, Well the book says it is to be. Maher tries to have it be both ways. Here is an intelligent and peaceful Muslim woman who buys into the theory he spouted to the Christians and he has to attack her. It doesn't work.

Of course, Maher is preaching to the choir in this movie because no real religious person is going to watch it. He makes the point repeatedly that the story of Jesus follows countless ancient myths, like Horus and that religion is man-made solely. Maher doesn't believe in God and he has problems with God because he asks those all too frequent questions "Why would God allow the Holocaust to happen" Or "Why would 9-11 happen?" These are important questions to non-believers and the only answer faith based people can give is that we can never understand God's will. For Maher, those kinds of answers are not even close to sufficient. Towards the end of the movie, Maher loses that sense of humor and goes for the jugular in two impressively written and even more impressively delivered rants aimed square at not just people of faith, but people who do not have faith, but refuse to challenge faith based people. Maher is angry and eloquent all at the same time and his message is clear: Religion, with its violence, intolerance and hypocrisy, is dangerous. If God was not involved any group who practiced such blatant homophobia, violence and monetary hypocrisy would be considered a blight on mankind.

I do want to mention that Religulous is a very funny and interesting movie. I did not mean for this to turn solely on religion, but I also want to say that Maher was not exactly fair and balanced here. He did get intelligent men to debate him and Maher did hold his own and at times best people, but Maher spends an awful long amount of time grouping religion into religious fanaticism. Not all people of faith are out for blood and not all people of faith are homophobic. The religions may have homophobia engraved in the tenets, but not all people who subscribe to religion are fanatics and I am not sure that group was represented well in Maher's skewering of religion. Bill Maher makes so many great points, but at times, he is does get lost in his own mission. Of course, there are times when he doesn't even have to make the jokes because the jokes just happen, like two theme parks- one based solely around the Crucifixion and another by a faith based group out to explain science and the bible co-existing by having animitronic dinosaurs right next to anamitronic children. Those jokes can't be written folks!

Final Grade: B

American Teen

This movie is getting all kinds of praise for the realistic portrayal of teen age life in the wake of stuff like The Hills. However, there are also many people on-line claiming the whole thing is staged and fake, much like The Hills. I cannot comment on such things because I tend to believe most documentaries have staged moments in them, or moments heightened for dramatic effect, I think a movie is supposed to be good storytelling above all else and if things have to be recreated to capture good story telling, well that is fine by me.

A few years ago a woman, Natalie Burstein, set out to make a documentary about real high school life. She wanted to make it wholly American so she wanted to go to the Midwest. She wanted ethnic diversity but had trouble finding that. She e-mailed all kinds of high school and students and finally settled on a little town in Indiana and she found her 4 subjects. She found 4 students with interesting lives that differed and she probably had to make sure she found 4 kids who would be good on camera. Colin, Megan, Geoff and Hannah are the four kids we take our journey with.

Colin is the star of the basketball team, which is the big sport at the school. He is not particularly good looking, but he gets the girls because he is the star athlete. His dad spends his days as an Elvis impersonator. Colin's biggest issue in the movie is getting into college. He can only go to college if he gets a basketball scholarship, but his senior year in basketball is not going so well. He dreams of playing for a big NCAA division 1 school and so he is trying to win all of his games by himself. It isn't until he can learn to play with the team that he can possibly be successful. Colin is a nice quiet kid who loves his dad, but is letting the stress get to him. He has probably the least screen time of the 4 because he just isn't magnetic a personality.

Megan is the villain of this story. She is your typical hot cheerleader/student body president/evil bitch. She has a male best friend who hooks up with one of her friends all hell breaks loose. The girl sends a topless picture to Megan's best friends and soon the entire school has the picture. Megan bitches about losing her friends, but she treats them like shit. She is not a very nice person, but she has trouble as well. She is worried she will not get into Notre Dame like all of her brothers before her. She also has a family tragedy that comes out just in time to kind of redeem her.

Geoff is the band geek of the story. He is a sweet kid with braces and terrible acne and he is dying for a girl friend. Throughout the movie we see him try and overcome his image issues and get a date. He loves Zelda and is aware that no one thinks about him. He is a tragic figure and I think the one most people will relate to. He does get a few girls during the course of the movie, which does kind of call into question the motives of the girls. He goes 3 years without a girl then in his senior year he had 3? I hope the girls weren't out to be on screen, because he is a sweet kid.

Hannah is the real star of the movie. She is an outcast artist, who wrestles with manic depression. Her mother is a manic depressive and she cannot live with her. Hannah begins the story as super happy but a break up sends her in a downward spiral and she doesn't spend much time in school for a while. The whole thing is cringe inducing and you find yourself hoping she will overcome her issues and get back to school. She is a beautiful young lady but doesn't believe in herself in that aspect. She is dying to get away from small Midwest life and desires to be in California.

Who knows what the real point of the movie is, but it does show a pretty accurate portrayal of teenage life. I think everyone can relate to aspects of the story, either in terms of school or friends or even family life. Some of these kids are too pressured for school and some have to deal with peer pressure. The kids don't really interact with each other, as they run in different circles, but the one time Hannah and Megan are seen together, it is really uncomfortable. I think the movie found the right kids and it doesn't a pretty good job of allowing us to get to know them. My only real complaint about the film is the animated sequences they use. Often times they cut to these bizarre sequences when the students are at the most vulnerable. The director either didn't trust the kids or trust the audience enough to just put the cameras on the kids and let them talk it out. I would have been so much more engaged if I could see Hannah talking about her she thinks everyone hates her as opposed to watching a weird claymation like sequence.

In a world where teens have blogs and vlogs and are obsessed with wanting to be famous, this is the perfect documentary. It is almost a time capsule of how things are now. We live in a society that believes little should be private anymore; it is a world where we have access to so much of each other and to people we do not know. American Teen captures that. I am not sure it is as provocative as it could have been and at times I wondered why this was on the big screen, but overall I laughed and worried with the kids and I silently cheered for the good things that happened.

Final Grade: B-

Young at Heart

When it comes to documentaries I feel like there are two kinds- those meant to incite anger or disgust and those meant to inspire. When done well, they do not only achieve their goal, but often times stay with me for days after. There was a time when I was bored by documentaries, but a few years ago I was shown the error of my ways by riveting documentaries like Spellbound, Bowling for Columbine, Wordplay and Super Size Me. Young at Heart plants its goal directly in the category that is meant to inspire us, but does it succeed?

Stephan Walker fell in love with the singing group Young at Heart the first time he heard them that he wanted to document them for television. After the success of it, he re cut his footage and turned it into a feature length film. Young at Heart is a choral group of senior citizens singing popular music, often punk rock. They sing songs from The Ramones, The Clash, Sonic Youth, James Brown, Outkast, Coldplay and others. If it sounds a lot gimmicky, give it time. Walker filmed for seven weeks as the group was getting ready for a new tour. Bob Cilman, the director of the chorus, started the group in the 1980s where the group sang old Vaudeville numbers, but the group has obviously changed its tune now. Cilman is a task master who does not treat the senior citizens with kid gloves and he is often expressing his disappointment, especially with the new songs- I feel Good, I can do it and Schizophrenia. For this particular tour, Cilman wants to bring back two former choir members, Fred and Bob, to sing a duet of Coldplay's "Fix You." Fred and Bob both had to leave the group due to health complications. In between the rehearsals we get to know some of the choir members and get invited into their homes. This is where the movie really gets it's heart because the old folks are some serious characters. The ones that really seem to love the camera are Eileen, a 92-year-old flirt; Lenard, a speed demon on the road; Steve, who still loves sex; and Joe, the star of the group. Spliced throughout the movie are music videos by the group to songs like I wanna be Sedated and Staying Alive.

Young at Heart is the kind of movie that will have you laughing one second and have you tearing up in the very next moment. Death is never too far away from the thoughts of the group and we even see death hit the group twice. However, this is not a sad movie; it is a movie that reinforces life. It is a movie that believes the power of music can make anyone feel young again and the members of the group truly believe they can go on as long as they have the music. It is a very touching story and while the director sometimes gets in his own way, the story never feels forced. I never felt like I was being manipulated into a specific emotion because the group members are so genuine it is hard not to want them to be your grandparents. Whether it is Fred's bad Rodney Dangerfield like jokes, Steve flexing in the mirror or the whole group dancing around to "I Feel Good." There is a life and a spirit in these senior citizens that made me embarrassed to feel the way I feel about life. As one guy says "Singing makes you forget the aches of the knees, the hips and the breathing." About death, Eileen said "I told them to go on without me because I will be sitting on my rainbow in the sky watching over them." It sounds cheesy, but as I sit here typing this remembering this adorable 92 year old saying it, I get choked up.

My only complaint about the movie is about the band director, Bob Cilman. This guy comes off often like a total tool. He seems narcissistic, like he is doing this just to get the glory. He performs in stage with them- taking solos, dancing, interrupting- and he is kind of annoying. However, he redeems himself mostly by the time the film ends. Moreover, while the group feels like an exploitation of old people, it is not. Trust me, people may have gone to watch this group as a carnival side show but were soon in love with the group. These group members have a real passion for singing and for life and it is clear that they are not being exploited. This is a sincere group of singers, dancers and life livers. Some of them can really sing well and listening to senior citizens sings lyrics like "If you say that you are mine/ I'll be here 'til the end of time" gives the words a whole new meaning. When the group sings "Nothing compares to you" as a tribute to a fallen friend and they do it at a prison where criminals are tearing up as well, just try and not shed tears. The climatic concert provides the joyous climax but it also provides the most touching, heart breaking moment. The duet of "Fix You" became a solo and while the song on its own is a heart wrenching song, Chris Martin's whiny singing voice gets in the way of the lyrics. Here, with a deep smooth baritone, Fred gets every ounce of sadness out of that gorgeously written song and it provides such an emotional out pouring on so many levels it made me want to call my estranged grandparents and hug them via phone.

Documentaries are not for everyone, but a movie like this should be. Maybe I am more emotional than others, but I really feel this movie is genuinely moving and am not surprised that the film has played to standing ovations. If you get the chance to check it out, I really recommend it.

Final Grade: A

Sicko

How does one review a Michael Moore movie? Do you review it based solely on whether you are entertained or moved? Can you give an unbiased review if you either agree or disagree with the man and his methods? Do you just put who he is aside and look specifically at the issue at hand? I really don't know. What I do know is that Michael Moore is trying to raise the level of debate in this country. Sadly, he puts so many people off with his methods that only those who vehemently agree with him will probably even see the movie, so it negates the debating ability of the film. The man himself causes quite a stir in most circles of people. He is a rabble rouser, an overweight, smug, self satisfied man who goes out of his way to ruffle the feather of those on both sides. Is he genuine in his caring for the subjects about which he documents? Yes and no, if you ask me. I felt he really cared about gun control in Bowling For Columbine, but Fahrenheit 9/11 felt like it was only for the money. Of course, that could have been because it just came out too early. At the time of the release of Fahrenheit the country was still mostly solidified around 9/11 and the war on terror. If he had released it today with Bush's approval rating constantly dropping, it might have rung a bit more true, but that is neither here nor there for his new movie.


Sicko is not about those without health insurance as Moore tells us at the beginning. It is for those of us with health insurance. It is for those of us who belong to HMOs. It is for Americans in general. Now, when dealing with a Moore film you know what you are getting yourself into. He may round some numbers up or down to fit what he is doing, but he doesn't just pull things from thin air. He may show worst and best case scenarios to get his point across, but in the end it is almost always very effective and this movie is full of incredibly effective moments. Unlike Columbine and Fahrenheit, Moore is not the main character in this movie. Yes, we here his voice throughout but he lets his subjects get a majority of the screen time here. He travels all over our country, Canada, France, Britain and most famously, Cuba. We hear horror stories of the HMO system from patients, former HMO doctors, HMO call screeners and a few other inside people who are disgusted by what they used to do. Now, I am not sure entirely how I feel about the issue of health care in our country but this movie will make you disgusted by it. We watch a woman break down into a blubbering mess as she recalls her daughter dying in a hospital because it was not an Kaiser hospital and the insurance would not be paying for anything. Then we go to another country where a woman had a kid with the same condition but was able to get help without problem because she lived in France, the country with the best health care. In this movie it seems that some sort of socialized medicine is the best method, although the other side is always quick to point out that the care is usually less than stellar.


The thing in this movie that gets me in the final 35 minutes when Moore introduces us to 9/11 rescue workers and 9/11 volunteers who have health problems due to that horrendous day in our history. Now, one could say that Moore is merely playing on the emotions of the country, but I have to disagree. First of all, when you see Moore with these people you can see how much he cares about our 9/11 heroes. At times Moore comes off smug and pretentious but here is where you see the humane side of him in spades. He is attempting to show us that if our heroes (and make no doubt about it, those who helped in 9/11 are the pure definition of heroes) can't get appropriate care then we are screwed! Now in his glorious stunt at the end of the movie, Moore attempts to take 3 boatloads of people to Guantanamo Bay to get them medical care because the prisoners at that prison are given incredible amounts of health care. It doesn't work, so instead, Moore takes them to a Cuban hospital where the sick people get every test they need, all the medication they need and great service for very cheap. Now, who knows if that is how it usually goes, but considering Cuba is supposed to be the land of Satan, it was a very touching moment to see these 9/11 heroes finally getting the care they needed.


I still believe a debate needs to happen on this issue and I think more people should see this movie. It is quite funny with a great Star Wars bit in there and Moore knows how to effectively use music and sound bites for comic effect. He is a professional at this stuff and this is a very solid movie. I laughed and I teared up. I was outraged when I was supposed to be and I laughed at the audacity of our country when I was supposed to.