4 – The Big One
In 1996 Michael Moore went onto a book tour to promote his first literary work ‘Downsize This! Random Threats from an Unarmed American’ and, in typical Moore fashion, filmed his travels from city-to-city. Along the way he encounters local residents, many of whom reflect the plight that was being covered in his book; corporate America relocating their factories to overseas territories to exploit cheap labour so they can “remain competitive,” and these companies placing their allegiances to stockholders rather than their employees. This is more tragic when it is revealed that all of these companies were experiencing record profits beforehand – in one shocking interview, Moore understands that if the PayDay candy factory had excelled in profits sooner then the relocation would’ve also occurred sooner, but if it had been in a slow decline, the employees would’ve kept their jobs. Moore’s “That’s insane!” reaction is indeed apt.
Unlike his previous attempt to curate comedy, the laughs here are much more natural; the self-deprecation, the exchanges with his fans, and how the various tour managers respond to his antics make this a more intimate experience. Further still, these moments of brevity compliment the political stunts, his personal political commentary on modern America at radio talk-shows, and his frequent questioning of staff employees over working conditions – the most abrupt, and fairly intrusive, moment was asking two airline attendants about their wage increases; needless to say, it their pay wasn’t great.
This travelogue is also the first time Moore becomes more tenacious and passive-aggressive in his satirical stunts. When Moore meets two corporate representatives to hand them a giant eight cents cheque – the hourly wage the company will be paying their Mexican employees – the representatives are embarrassed and are uncomfortable in their demeanour, given that the “remain competitive” mantra didn’t sway this activist, and this will delight viewers. It’s also at an early stage in Moore’s career where he is able successfully pulling these stunts without the foray of security preventing him. This was definitely Moore’s best outing pre-Bowling for Columbine.
Speaking of which…
3 – Bowling for Columbine
As a non-American, I, like many fellow Europeans, find America’s gun culture perplexing; despite the overwhelming evidence (and borderline commonsense) to implement harsher gun laws or the removal of them entirely, America love their guns and the rest of the world can only look on. Michael Moore takes the 1999 Columbine High School shooting as his primary case study to explore America’s relationship with their beloved firearms.
This film is markedly different from other Michael Moore films for focus is less on privatisation and capitalism, and more on the confliction of ideals. Moore launches from the case study of a bank that gives customers a free rifle when they open an account, to the systematic bombings of nondescript nations perpetrated by the US government – from the 1960s through to 2002. This broadening of the scope marks the first time that Moore uses the microcosm of an issue to be reflective, even synonymous, to a societal one; the Columbine shooting did not occur in a vacuum, and Moore explores what happened, and what is happening. In conclusion, it would appear the State’s complicit nature in utilising mechanised destruction to overthrow other national leaders (at times, democratically elected leaders) for their own gain.
What Moore does retain his a sense of humour: the montage of the CIA’s coup d’état against various countries is played to Louis Armstrong’s ‘What a Wonderful World’ and the animated ‘Brief History of America’ short notably highlight the passive-aggressive frustration Moore has towards his nation.
In exploring the gun culture that is seen as the backbone of American society, Moore takes a huge gamble by questioning the cultural sensibility, and their national right, in owning a firearm. Further still, it was released months after the 9/11 attacks when American patriotism was highly contested. In short, one may see this film as one that makes greater sense to non-Americans than to Americans themselves, for it would become the film that garnered Moore much international recognition.
2 – Sicko
Prior to this Michael Moore would focus on the victims of the systemic exploitation of the laid-off employees, or the failings of the Bush administration with the nation’s gun laws, or the invasion of Iraq. In short, the individuals that were not complicit with the rules were seen to be punished as a result of their status. So when Moore introduces two individuals who fell ill without health insurance and had to pay the (incredibly) expensive hospital bills, one is led to believe that this will be business as usual. However, the announcement of the 250 million Americans who do pay health insurance shifts from the marginalised victims akin to his previous films, to the entirety of the American populace.
Moore shows no restraint in highlighting the corruptive actions of health insurance companies i.e. their refusal to treat terminal patients for the sake of profit. Laden with irony Moore contrasts, with archival footage, the “red carpet treatment” that these “happy customers” would benefit from their insurance companies with the reality of denied treatment, deadly oversights (one interviewee died shortly after the film due to her insurance company deducing her tumour to not be life threatening), and a lack of compensation. Such irony abounds the film as Moore historicises privatised healthcare, and looks overseas to the varying degrees of socialised healthcare in nations like Canada, Japan, and the UK. While his reverence for other systems leans towards an over-appraisal for them, and to aggrandise the patients benefits that overlooks some of their shortcomings, it does highlight that fundamentally, the America healthcare system does not work except for the CEO’s.
In an attempt for a more “balanced” view, Moore interviews those who worked for these insurance companies, and discovers the extent of the problem. It’s these human stories that the insights become more profound, and equally horrifying, as the corruptive practices seem to permeate the entire healthcare profession: doctors were paid more for turning patients away.
Sicko is one of Moore’s better films to date as he managed to not only lift the veil of the facade of privatised healthcare, but in conjunction with the myth that socialised services equate to a Communist regime.
1 – Fahrenheit 9/11
Michael Moore’s disdain for George W. Bush may cloud his judgement, which results in conspiratorial rhetoric, but that doesn’t hide some of the intelligently presented links between individuals of Bush’s past and his affiliations with dictators across the globe. It’s obvious the illegal Iraq war was for the oil, and the vested interest the Saudi Arabian princes had/have in the American economy is suspect –given the secrecy the State officials have in keeping this relationship hidden in plain sight – therefore, Moore simply probes around, joins the dots, and says to his audience: “Look, there’s more going on here.”
From such secretive State protocols, Moore discovers the cover-ups are increasingly more brazen, and sometimes flippantly admitted. In one daunting moment, Moore asks who read the Patriot Act before Congress unanimously signed away on it, to which one man responds, “We don’t read most of the bills that pass through.” The horrors of the Bush administration don’t stop here; upon viewing the amoral actions of the troops in Iraq, Moore partly absolves their responsibility by deducing that the invasion of the middle-east is a thinly veiled disguise of moral justice, and is largely for corporate interests. Moore queries: how do you expect the troops to behave in that given situation?
The complexity of this scandal does require a greater engagement with American politics, and to be viewed with an open mind. Moore accumulates all this information, is able to condense it into a two-hour runtime, and utilises every second to present his most intellectually stimulating documentary to date. It’s not as sentimental as Moore’s other films for he puts all that energy into dismantling the Bush ideology, and to warn viewers of where the modern world is heading.
It’s a scathing critique of Bush’s first term in office, and an important documentary that brought the exposé of this illegal war to general knowledge. With a whole Wikipedia page dedicated to covering the controversial arguments that Michael Moore presented in this Palme d’Or winning film, it’s not hard to understand why this is his best film to date. Any film that produces such divisive responses is one that is definitely worth your time.
Matthew Lee
. url=”.” . width=”100%” height=”150″ iframe=”true” /]
