I'm a Michael Moore fan. I think I may stand alone on this blog site as one, but I'll explain why I am to the non-believers here as the polarization I see against this man is probably only equalled by one other man I know of right now. To so many people now, if you say Moore's name you see the bile and venom arise from within as they prepare to scream to the heavens 'Traitor!' Or worse, actually, 'Hack!' The film "Fahrenheit 9/11" just angered too many people. But I was a fan long before that film. His show 'TV Nation' on Fox in '97 is where I first learned about him. He was fighting consumer injustice on that show. I also saw 'Roger & Me' at a film festival around the time the show was on, and it just made me a bigger fan. At the time, I was in a very strong Union (I'm still in it although non-active) and heavily involved, so the movie spoke volumes to me about where I already saw American workers rights going. I recorded every 'TV Nation' and tried to get anyone I knew to watch it. I also recorded every 'X-Files' and lauded it as well, but I've since bought the entire 'TV Nation' series on dvd, and have never even considered buying 'X-Files'. I guess that says something. I also own his entire 'Awful Truth' series on dvd.
I won't go into his entire film or tv history. Suffice it to say, I thought the day he shut down the New York Stock Exchange shooting a Rage Against The Machine video was brilliant (only one of 3 days since opening it shut down). And, I was attending a class at CU Boulder, about 15 miles from Columbine High School, the day of the shootings. Obviously, 'Bowling For Columbine' held special interest for me. And then 'Fahrenhiet 9/11'. It didn't make me any more unhappy with the current administration then I already was. It didn't tell me much more about the 2000 elections and September 11th then I already knew. But it sure was nice seeing someone finally saying it all out loud. So many know him for speaking against the government, but that's not really what he is about. There was just too much happening to ignore. Michael Moore is about helping the little people, and righting the wrongs, as he percieves them, they face. He is pro American worker and pro American consumer, and jsut hatesd seeing people taken advantage of. Which brings us to 'Sicko' his new documentary about the health care system. I think Swany has made clear before he is no fan of Michael Moore's. And now as a health care provider himself, I've been wondering if he has any interest in the upcoming film, or not.
You can hate his politics, hate his documentary style, hate his facts, hate his hats, but you got to admit; The man knows how to make some pretty good laughs out of some pretty awful things.
I'll be there opening day, along with my wife who was a bigger fan of his then me long before we ever met. My wife with health issues who is constantly having trouble with her insurance provider over prescriptions. Oh yeah, I already know I'll like this film, too.
3 comments:
Although I probably agree with Moore on a great number of things, I don't like the MTV style of documentary that 9/11 was. More importantly, I don't like how he leaves out important information.
Case in point is Fahrenheit: He makes mention of the only planes flying on the 12th were ferrying some of Bin Laden's family members, by order of the administration. That's it. No more info.
This insinuates - or allows conspiracy folks to deduce - that Bush was in cahoots with Bin Laden. The important piece of information left out is Bin Laden has been estranged from his family for years. They think he is friggin' nuts (imagine that).
So then we have folks spouting off nutty theories like the loose change thing, which simply gives ammunition to supporters of Bush's war on terror that detractors are all retarded. It weakens the cause.
We don't need to dig deep and conjure up wild accusations. The evidence is right there on the surface. And even if I do agree with Moore on a lot of things, I think that a documentary should be more objective, and definitely inclusive of all relevant information. I think leaving out pertinent information in order to sway opinion is underhanded, even if I agree with the opinion.
I always hesitate to bring up contentious issues via text because I am never sure how the reader will take it. Everyonce and while I go out on a limb and bring something up just to make us all think, not necessarily to make a point. So my next question truly is a question I would encourage yall to think about. I am in the process of thinking through it and have not fully landed.
So here goes. Is it possible to be pro worker and pro consumer at the same time in our American culture?
Since I agree that the current U.S. health care system has some serious problems, I'll probably give Sicko a view, although don't be surprised if I wait for it to come out on DVD. I'll agree with you that Michael Moore makes entertaining films, and brings to light issues that the average American probably doesn't give two seconds of thought to otherwise.
My problem is as what Firecracker George already pointed out, that Michael Moore tends to shape his argument by leaving important details out. It's no better than the Bush administration sifting through intelligence trying to find information that could be cherry-picked to give reason for invading Iraq. OK, maybe not an equal argument, but still...
Some of Michael Moore's antics that border on sensationalism bother me, too. Taking volunteer 9/11 rescue workers on a boat to Guantonamo Bay and demanding via megaphone equal healthcare for them as is given to prisoners of war makes a mockery out of what is a much more complex argument. It's apples and oranges he's trying to use to make comparisons. Perhaps his purpose is to get a bit of a laugh and make a point at the same time, but it just loses me.
Combine all that, and you have a theater full of like-minded moviegoers who already agree with most of the points Michael Moore makes in his films before the movie even starts. I watched Fahrenheit 9/11 in the theater, and felt like I was at a Democratic rally. Rather than trying to sway the skeptics, it only served to polarize the political atmosphere further.
Anywho, I suggest talking up my wife sometime. Healthcare policy and reform is a big interest of hers and was a major field of study during her years in both undergraduate and graduate school, which is why she's such a huge Hillary supporter. Being part of that "like-minded" crowd I mentioned above, I'm sure she'll be watching Sicko, but I imagine she could fill in all those details Michael Moore will most likely and conveniently leave out.
As far as Wild Willie's comment, I think it's possible to be both pro-worker and pro-consumer. Each one helps the other, if you keep them in balance. Treat the worker fairly, and he makes a good product which helps the consumer. In turn, the consumer feels good about paying a fair price, and the worker is well compensated. It's the middle man pulling a profit for himself that mucks it all up. Hmmm. This sort of relates to the healthcare mess. Something is wrong when medical administrators are making two to three times more than the actual physicians busting their butts to work 80+ hours a week to provide the actual medical service and care. Oh, don't get me started...
Post a Comment