Michael Moore: Help Save Our CEO's

[Johann]

The trailer for Mike's new "vampire" movie (his words) is sheer brilliance.

He just asks the audience to help out fellow Americans, by donating to the "Save our CEO's" campaign. He holds up a tin can with "Save Our CEO's" on it, petitioning the viewer to keep up with the bailouts, because, let's face it. Bailouts of CEO's and major corporations make EVERYBODY happy.
Right?

Everybody here knows how I feel about Moore.
I love the man and what he's always stood for.

The title of his new film?:
Capitalism: A Love Story

[Johann]

I haven't read any reviews of Michael Moore's new film which premiered here in Toronto, but I have seen clips from his website where he talks about how he hopes President Obama is the Franklin D.Roosevelt of our time. Mike has apparently dug up footage (found in South Carolina) of Roosevelt speaking, that's over 60 years old, that the American public has never seen or heard before.
It's about a vision that that President had for America.
And juxtaposed with today's map of the U.S.'s face, it is supposed to be powerful. There are people commenting that this film is Moore's finest work ever, and that gets me really really excited, because I've loved every film he's done, and how he's done them. "ON POINT", Mike. Always ON POINT, whether 40% of the world disagrees with you or not.

Always on point. Moore is never malicious.
He points out obvious things.
He asks questions and demands answers.
But he needs help. From his fellow countrymen, who seem to be on the fence half the fucking time.
With 11 homes foreclosed in the time I've taken to write this much text, there is a serious crisis in America right now.
Moore wants a moratorium on foreclosures from President Obama. Capitalism is EVIL. It has a very very evil side to it, much darker and nastier than people want to admit or even look at.

The Iraq war was straight up Capitalism.
You want debate?
Bring it now.
I'd love to talk turkey on Capitalism. Love to start some dialogue on how the "free market" ain't all that free or democratic.

Moore's film has been tagged as a sure-fire Oscar winner.
Let's see.
Bring the heat. I got my oven mitts on. How about you?

[Johann]

I'd like to just fire off a few words to those readers out there who might not like Michael Moore or what he does.

Personally, (I always speak personally) I think anyone who can't see that what he's doing/has done with his films, books, etc. is brilliant and good are just plain ignorant assclowns.
Straight up.
They are "Assclowns from Planet "SPIN IT".
I'll go along with their claim that his films are pure propaganda.
The best, most revolutionary, beautifully executed pieces of propaganda ever made. For true, noble aims.
No one else on the planet does that, let alone a guy from Flint with a high school education.

His record for truly helping those who do not have a voice is staggering. For the Moore haters to simply bypass that extraordinarily human and compassionate nature of the man is simply disgraceful. Who saw him in Bowling For Columbine go to K-Mart and ask for a refund (with the victims) for the fucking bullets that were bought there and were lodged in their fucking bodies? Huh? Who saw that? Who didn't have massive pride that a man with a movie camera cared and dared to do such a thing?
If you didn't, again, YOU'RE AN ASSCLOWN.
I am so sick and fucking tired of the Moore bashers.
You don't like his work?
Then YOU make a film to counter it, buster.
YOU get out there and counter his brilliant, important cinema with something that relegates him to the loony bin.
Hard to do, isn't it?
Until you do it, shut the HELL UP.
His movies are extremely engaging and pack serious punch.
If you can't see that and acknowledge that, then maybe you need to stop watching films. Your brain can't process relevant, important shit. Your politics or your upbringing prevent you from seeing truth.

But it's OK. I understand you.
It's easier to forget him and what he's done than to address what he shows you, isn't it?
WAAAAAY easier.

[Johann]

Almost 800,000 homes have been foreclosed in the U.S. in 3 months time.
Almost 800,000.
source: youtube video: "EVICTION DAY: foreclosure crisis forces man from home (5 mins.)"

I read Manohla Dargis' great review of Moore's new film, and I snagged these quotes from FDR from it:

True individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence

People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

[Johann]

I read Peter Travers favorable review of Moore's latest on RollingStone.com and below that review is a comment by a fellow who said something like this (paraphrasing but the gist is there):

"To take lessons in capitalism from a multi-millionaire is hypocrisy. Moore is the definition of hypocrisy. What's next? A movie from Cheney on pacifism? Wake up people!"




Let's take that commentary to the paper shredder, shall we?

Moore has stated in a video I saw of a Minnesota premiere of his new film (3 weeks ago) that every time he goes to make a film, he has to fight for every single dime he gets to make his next picture. "I wouldn't wish that process on my worst enemy" he said. If it wasn't for the mammoth success of Fahrenheit 9/11, (and his pitching his next projects as sequels to it) he wouldn't get a dime.
Of those millions he's made, (well deserved and earned I might add- people go to his fucking films) he pours a lot of it into his own productions. No one is helping Michael Moore, outside of his fucking film crews. No one wants to really touch him or his work.
There's a "stay away!" quality to his name, another reason why I support him- it relegates his critics to an extreme netherworld of paranoia and irrationality.
What the fuck is it that they don't see about the primal decency that this man has? The primal righteousness of his causes?
The fact that he has the financial means to keep going with his brilliant and much-needed criticisms of sickening institutions makes me beam with pride for his legacy.
A true patriot.
All the way.
He represents the BEST that America has to offer, and those who can't see that are just plain ignorant and dismissive without any justification.
You should be grateful that he is willing to put it all on the line.
As I've said before (years ago in fact), he could just simply retire with his millions, never to be heard again.
But no, he gets out there and gets the information that the major news networks are too scared or too ignorant to present to the public.
The shit you see in his films is shit that no news network carries.
FOR THAT ALONE he deserves respect.

[Chris Knipp]

Michael Moore: CAPITALISM: A LOVE STORY (2009)

http://a.imageshack.us/img412/4428/capitalismalovestorym.jpg

Review by Chris Knipp

Michael Moore gets radical, in the literal sense

Roger and Me showed how General Motors allowed the town of Flint, Michigan, where Michael Moore grew up, to just wither away. Bowling for Columbine showed how American violence traces back to love of guns. Fahrenheit 9/11 is one of several films showing how the Bush administration used the 2001 terrorist attacks to lure America and its allies into unnecessary and costly wars (they still go on). Sicko showed up the mess the American health care system is in and detailed how many other countries have better ones that, unlike the US, guarantee care to everyone (this is still true, and as Obama tries to achieve government health care reform, Sicko is Moore's most relevant film of the moment) . In his new film, Capitalism: A Love Story, Moore's focus is more basic: the fundamental economic system, which is also political. Or is it just "our way of life"? For all the anger and sense of wrong of the pushed-through "taxpayer" bailouts of Wall Street investment bankers, the foreclosures, and the skyrocketing American unemployment, this film doesn't feel as urgent as Fahrenheit or as well-researched (and freshly informative) as Sicko. Nonetheless it is more basic and for the first time Moore focuses on morals. He goes to the Catholic priest who married him and his wife, the one who married his sister-in-law, and their bishop, and all declare that capitalism advocates values that are un-Christian. (If capitalism encourages greed, greed is avarice, and avarice is one of the seven deadly sins.)

This is touchy stuff, but it seems that the director felt the moment was ripe to bring it up. He was proven more than right when the financial meltdown came in late 2008: this was a sign that the greed was destroying us. And for a change, certain words seemed no longer taboo. Moore noted that Bush made a speech touting the capitalist system and while campaigning Obama said something about sharing the wealth that led the opposition to accuse him of being a socialist. A socialist! The word could as well be Satanist or pedophile as far as US conservatives are concerned. It's so inflammatory in this country Moore himself doesn't dare use the word of himself. When asked if he was a socialist by Amy Goodman on Democracy Now! at the end of an hour-long interview there was an awkward silence. Moore said, "I'm a heterosexual. . .I'm overweight. . . ." and then the program ran out of time. They say in Canada he isn't so reticent.

As he tells it Moore was already working on this film when the meltdown came. The average guy sees the government bailouts as greed. Some progressive economists, such as Nobel laureate and NYTimes op-ed columnist Paul Krugman, have consistently argued that the bailouts were necessary; that they just haven't been bold and thorough enough. The concept that "the taxpayer" is paying for them is a little simplistic. In that sense we're all paying for everything. It's better to be saving the financial system than to be invading Iraq and Afghanistan and bombing Pakistan -- and it costs much less too.

Moore jumps around, playing his old games: asking admission to General Motors headquarters, or AIG, stringing "Crime Scene" yellow tapes around the Stock Market and big banks; following a window and door factory where all the workers were let go, but then decided to sit in at the factory until they got their severance packages from Bank of America. There's a lot about foreclosures, how they happen, who has fought them, and who exploits them. There are several companies where the workers are actual shareholders who have a vote on what happens, a line operator gets $65,000 a year, more than some airline pilots, whom Moore reveals to be so underpaid some have had to resort to food stamps. Obama did once spout vaguely socialist ideas, but Moore shows how that was dealt with: big banks made him beholden by becoming major contributors to his campaign. Moore says Goldman Sachs was the biggest, with a million dollars; actually the University of California is listed above that with a million five.

Despite this scattershot approach, in an obvious way Moore returns here to the more linear themes of his maiden voyage, Roger and Me, and as Variety's Leslie Felperin argues, it's true that Moore has a right to appear often in this one, because once again his home town of Flint, Michigan, and Detroit, are Exhibits A and B in his story of the same thing Roger and Me highlighted: the way corporate fat cats leave workers high and dry, letting whole cities and towns to fester and wither away. In the Democracy Now! interview, Moore suggested that Obama ought to exercise his authority as (in a sense) GM's new CEO, and see to it that the company is used for green transportation development, not simply allowed to die.

Three are many tear-jerking moments here. Moore has a field day with a couple who're ejected from their farmhouse complex and even get paid $1,000 -- the ultimate humiliation -- to get rid of the contents of their house. A black family in another sequence is helped by an activist group to return to their foreclosed house and reoccupy it, after living in a truck. Moore goes overboard on this stuff. As Felperin says, Moore would probably show puppies personally drowned by (Bush Treasury Secretary and former Goldman, Sachs CEO) Hank Paulson if he could.

But the Michael Moore approach is not that of more analytical documentaries like The Corporation. He wants to wake you up and make you mad. He even says at the end of Capitalism: A Love Story that he hopes people in the audience will go out and help. Perhaps the most powerful -- and important -- argument Moore presents is that of the Catholic priests: that capitalism, as it's practiced nowadays anyway, is un-Christian -- and in the terms of any spiritual system, is morally wrong. Remember the line in the Bible, "And again I say to you: It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven"? Also important, if underdeveloped, in this complicated, effective piece of economic and political agitprop, is the historical line traced back to the Fifties, when life was relatively comfortable, college and medical care were affordable, through the Eighties, when President Reagan turned the country over to the corporations and the consummate evil yuppie character Gordon Gekko in Oliver Stone's Wall Street declared "Greed is good." Since then, as Moore rapidly points out, the wealth has been gobbled up more and more by the few at the top: the middle class has been ravaged and the poor have become more numerous. If capitalism, as an old Fifties instructional film here intones, is "our American way of life," then how come it's failing to serve so many Americans?

At this point it would have been much better if Moore had been less "resolutely U.S.-centric" (Felperin) -- because capitalist economies exist in other countries alongside systems of social services, alongside socialist benefits for the many. It's not so much simply capitalism that is killing us (has not communism been proven a failure, or at least unrealizable in the real world?) but the cruel, Darwinian, selfish, do-or-die form of it that's practiced in America. Greed is not good. As Moore does point out repeatedly, ordinary and poor Americans have been hoodwinked by propagandists for American capitalism into thinking that the system is okay, however heartless and imbalanced, because they might hit the jackpot themselves someday. As Moore says, ordinary Americans are beginning to realize that just ain't true.

[Johann]

There goes Michael Moore again, preaching to the choir...

Greed is Un-Christian?
Try telling that to George W. Bush.
And Obama had major banks contribute to his campaign for President? really?

My God, I thought he was squeaky clean.
I'm so disappointed, Barack...
I should've known when you treat Stephen Harper like he's your fucking roommate.

Man, this really sucks.
You can't trust anyone nowadays...
Except Tommy Chong.

[Chris Knipp]

I saw a great movie about Beethoven last night, In Search of Beethoven, and when it described how he changed the name of his Third Symphony, scrapted out the dedication to Napoleon (literally tore a hole in the page, he was so mad) when Napoleon declared himself Emperor and changed his subtitle to the neutral "Heroic, "Eroica," I thought of Barak. He was a champion of freedom, but now he is becoming Emperor. Here is the list of top contributors to the Obama presidential campaign:
University of California $1,591,395
Goldman Sachs $994,795
Harvard University $854,747
Microsoft Corp $833,617
Google Inc $803,436
Citigroup Inc $701,290
JPMorgan Chase & Co $695,132
Time Warner $590,084
Sidley Austin LLP $588,598
Stanford University $586,557
National Amusements Inc $551,683
UBS AG $543,219
Wilmerhale Llp $542,618
Skadden, Arps et al $530,839
IBM Corp $528,822
Columbia University $528,302
Morgan Stanley $514,881
General Electric $499,130
US Government $494,820
Latham & Watkins $493,83 This is from here: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00009638. The site is called Open Secrets. Note they point out:
This table lists the top donors to this candidate in the 2008 election cycle. The organizations themselves did not donate , rather the money came from the organization's PAC, its individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.

Because of contribution limits, organizations that bundle together many individual contributions are often among the top donors to presidential candidates. These contributions can come from the organization's members or employees (and their families). The organization may support one candidate, or hedge its bets by supporting multiple candidates. Groups with national networks of donors - like EMILY's List and Club for Growth - make for particularly big bundlers. Whatever, Obama is in tight with Goldman, Sachs. And Goldman, Sachs rules the world.

[Johann]

All this time I was wondering exactly how he did it (win the election) and now I know. I thought it was sheer boldness and contributions from donors on the internet.

Wow, microsoft and Goldman Sachs, huh?
My admiration of Obama just hit the skids.
So disappointing...I should have known...
He's bought and sold too.
The one man who I thought was above all that shit, but he's just as corporate as the rest...

Man...
There are zero noble people in the political sphere.
Because if you're not directly sponsored, you work with those who are. Unbelievable.
Is nothing sacred anymore?

Don't answer that.

[Chris Knipp]

Well, yes, you should have known.

On the other hand you're overreacting. If you're awre of the American campaign finance system all this would be obvious to you. The real influence comes later, and grows day by day as Obama finds himself seated on the throne of the American Emprie.

A milllion and a half dollares really isn't very much money. It's only a drop in the bucket of the campaign funding. It costs more to buy a president.

And part of what is happening to Obama is just the usual shifting to the center, combined with his own policy of compromise and desire to have "dialogue" with all sides. Which in the case of the now right-wing dominated Republican Party, has been noted by commentators of every persuasion as a naive aim that has not brought him results, particularly in the health care debate.

[Johann]

Isn't that a massive conflict of interest?
Isn't that ILLEGAL?
If not, it should be.
How the hell can you have any faith in any politician when they are fucking bought and sold, just like stocks? Huh?

No one can stand on their own?
You cannot mount a campaign unless you have "inc." after your name?!
Man, this world truly is beyond redemption.
I don't care how much money it takes to run a campaign.
It should be raised YOURSELF. And if you can't do it, then you don't run. It's that simple. If you have donations from fucking Goldman Sachs and GE for fucks sakes, you have ZERO credibility.
Sorry, but thems the breaks.
You are no different from any businessman on the block.
I don't care what excuses they use. It's just so fucking wrong it's incredible.

American Empire indeed.
The founding fathers' heads have spun off their corpses..
The America of today is not the America they envisioned.
Rape and Pillage.
That's the new national anthem.
Un-fucking-believeable.
Obama..man...I was sooooo in his corner....

[Johann]

Hunter S. Thompson "gave up the ghost" because of this shit.

Because there truly is no one who is capable of restoring America.
The money just looks too good for these shitheads.
Michael Moore is the only one (with money) besides guys like Keith Olbermann who genuinely want to help the situation improve (or at least accurately assess what the problem exactly is).

It's so fucking depressing!
This planet is MIRED, man...
Mired in such colossal chickenshit.
With no one taking a stand that will help improve the conditions.
And the public...they need to be fucking slapped around too.
Stop watching Hell's Kitchen and Family Guy and do something, for the love of Christ...

There ain't no one in North America who should feel sorry for themselves or the situation you live in.
YOU ASKED FOR IT. DON'T BLAME ANYONE BUT YOURSELF.

[oscar jubis]

I think Michael Moore is just great. He is inimitable. That perfect blend of comedy, pathos and information. He is a populist who makes movies that everyone can enjoy. How can something so good for you be this entertaining? The two hours just flew by. I watched the film with about 200 UM students and a few professors. When the bit about our President Shalala getting a VIP loan from Countrywide Financial came out, the crowd gasped and roared like you wouldn't believe. I wonder if she's seen the film...

[Chris Knipp]

I tend to agree with you. I like him and forgive him almost everything, but he is widely hated and not universally admired as a filmmaker even by progressives. The blend also includes provocation -- much of that -- and sometimes, unfortunately, misinformation or excessively skewed information. The look and structure of his films is blatantly trashy at times. These are aspects that sometimes offend me. I like a polemical documentary that is immaculately informative and elegantly structured, like Mark Achbar, Jennifer Abbott's 2003 THE CORPORATION. But Moore's provocativeness is his key element and his strength. The very fact that he is completely unsubtle seems to work, and now more than ever it seems obvious that appeasing and being polite with the right wing is a useless game. It's not as simply as you would make it sound in your comment. I've never seen one of his films in a hostile audience and I don't think one ever would.

[Johann]

Watch the half-hour long video on Moore's main page of his website.
It's amazing.
It's absolutely amazing.
He tells it like it is. And he's trying to do something that is nothing short of Heroic.
The Pride I have in Michael Moore is in the stratosphere.

Any intelligent human being cannot deny his nobility at this point in history.

www.michaelmoore.com

[Johann]

I've watched the DVD about 5 times now. Awesome, powerfully relevant film.

First, Goldman Sachs and President Obama. In bed together. Married.
The economic bailout was orchestrated by Goldman Sachs and Treasury secretary Paulson.
That fact alone should end all support for Barack Obama and eliminate any faith in the United States government.
Sorry but it's true.
(I've had no faith in the U.S. government for almost a decade now, but at least they can seriously maintain my non-faith today!)
The rage should amp and ramp up in LONGEURS when you watch this movie. So many sickening injustices and practices are highlighted...

To see real footage of members of the US Congress stymied and stonewalled and FORCED to vote in favour of the bailout (remember, if they didn't do it, the ecomony would colllapse without question). The PEOPLE said "NO". But it was rammed through. Wall Street made gargantuan mistakes and what did they do? They forced the government to pay for it. FORCED THE GOVERNMENT, MANG!
Just try getting that $900 Billion back, SUCKERS!! HA AHAH HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

My main concern (or should I say "known fact" concern) is that the "economy" as we know it is going to be hellfire to endure for the next 30 years.
Nothing will be sustainable. You think it's bad NOW? You ain't seen nothing yet Chachi!
The most powerful thing about Moore's "Capitalism: A Love Story" is something Chris mentioned in his review: the priests who denounce Capitalism as "radically Evil". Those are real Christians to me, not the ones who watch the Simpsons or listen to U2 or drive a nice car.
The sequence with scenes from Zefferelli's Jesus of Nazareth dubbed with some British accented dude saying things like "I can't heal your pre-existing condition..He'll have to pay out of pocket!", "De-regulate the banking industry!" and "Go forth, and Maximize Profits!" is just plain awesome.
If you sit on your nice sofa at home and claim to be Christian, those scenes should be the equivalent of having a huge bucket of Holy Water dumped on your empty head. WAKE UP. If you drive a Lexus with a Christian cross dangling from your rear-view mirror, um, yeah, you're NOT getting into heaven. Belief simply isn't enough, Dexter..

Jimmy Carter gives a TV address in July 1979, warning about a Nation consumed by consumption, stating that one is defined not by what one DOES, but by what one OWNS. Moore describes him as "Debbie Downer", and that's exactly what he was to corporate America.
The man who replaced him was a perfect puppet, and those edited shots of Reagan slapping a woman in a movie, him as an advertising maverick, hawking everything from deodorant to laundry soap- was unbelievable. That should be enough to change any intelligent American's mind about how "great" Reagan was. He helped to turn America into the greediest, most radically corporate land mass on earth by taking orders directly from the CEO of Merrill Lynch- something I had absolutely no clue about! And George Bush Sr. was his right-hand man!

These kinds of revelations have made my love of Michael Moore ironclad. In a wasteland of media, here's a man who says "FUCK IT. If they never let me make another film again, so what? I've gotten the truth out. My WAY." He realizes the colossal damage that's been done all these years and he's showing everybody how it all played out (and still is playing out). It's devastating. In more ways than one.


I'll post more tomorrow. There's a lot to say on this. OH YES. There is a LOT to say...

[Chris Knipp]

I guess you're talking about CAPITALISM: A LOVE STORY? I've seen it but only once. Some of the info is treated as well elsewhere. For instance, Achbar and Abbot's 2003 THE CORPORATION is a fantastic and deeply enlightening documentary. And then Alex Gibney's ENRON: THE SMARTEST GUYS IN THE ROOM is great on the culture of corporate graft.

As for completely rejecting Obama, I have listed all the big things I think he and the post-Bush administration have failed to deal with as adequately as had been hoped for. However, Obama is making progress on a lot of fronts, even if it's disappointing. It's not a question of nothing at all, but of not enough. There have been restrictions on Wall Street, just not quite enough. There has been a stimulus package, just in Keynesian terms not enough -- yet; there still could be, if Obama gets his balls back.
Obama has not closed Guantanamo, but they have moved out a lot of the prisoners. Lots of steps, but not far enough. As for the "bailout", this is supported by Paul Krugman, and I do not think it was a criminal act but something that helped save us from economic disaster. The people said no, but it was rammed through? The people didn't know what they were talking about. At the same time, the fact that corporate CEO's are making more money than ever is wrong, part of the inadequate level of regulation.

I noted the stuff about Christianity and capitalism not being compatible in the film, but I don't really have an opinion on that because I'm not religious. What I can agree to is that pure capitalism is rapacious and inhumane.

What I might have liked more of in Moore's film would be the issue of labor organization. Various recent articles have emphasized that we can't have a sane economy or balanced employment until we have a strong labor movement again and stronger unions. Most of the unions collapsed one by one over the past forty years, and that goes hand in hand with the huge disparity between rich and poor. The working middle class has been wiped out. That goes along with the Internet and transport and other factors allowing for globalized production, so that domestic products have been wiped out and we're wearing clothes and using gadgets made in foreign sweatshops.

It's insensitive to talk about a country "consumed by consumption" when in fact right now the average guy is not earning enough to buy stuff and that's why the economy is in such bad shape. Jimmy Carter has been a nice senior citizen peacemaker but he wasn't much of a president.

But can I shut the door on Obama? No, I live here, not in Canada.

New diaappointment expressed by Frank Rich, the Sunday op ed columnist in the Times: Obama's speech about "ending" the "Iraq war," which Rich sees as completely emotionless and clueless. Even Gates has acknowledged that the Iraw "war" will always be taineted by the false pretexts on which it was started, no matter what it did or didn't accomplish. Obama has glossed over that and presented a Bush-friendly post mortem "end of the war" Iraq speech that forgets his own opposition to the war, and whose main purpose is to present a PR facade to a non-event: the false impression that the US is somehow ending its "involvement" in Iraq when it is there to stay, with an embassy reportedly the size of eighty football fields. It was not a "war." It was an invasion and an occupation. As an Iraqi I heard on Democracy Now recently declared, in Arabic, !هذا بلد محتل "hatha balad muhtal!" "This is an occupied country!" I didn't learn Arabic for nothing! It's still an occupied country, and it will be a long time before it ceases to be.

[Johann]

You can slam the door on Obama if you live in the United States.
On his election day he said (quite loudly): Change Has Come To America.
What change would that be? Skin color for the President? OK, I'll give you that one.
But what else has changed? Wall Street still runs amok. Corporations are still soulless and always will be.
Jobs are extinct, like you mentioned- everything is farmed out to China or someone cheaper.
Buy American? Buy WHAT? Boeing jets? Lockheed missiles? Bad reality TV?
Obama is beholden to Tiny Masters like Goldman Sachs and scores of others who helped get him elected.
He is their puppet. Like Bill Maher, "I thought there was a new sherriff in town". But there ain't.
I actually don't know what Obama stands for. I really don't. I thought I did, but in 2 years he hasn't done anything to combat the problems that America faces.
You can say I'm being too sweeping, not giving him a chance, but BROTHA, time is ticking, and the world needs swift Leadership in order to avoid an economic meltdown that will make this one seem like a 649 lottery win. Europe is in real bad shape.
I'm no prophet but even now I can tell that Obama's first term won't amount to anything. He says in Moore's film (to Joe the Plumber!YEAH! Joe the fuckin' Douchebag PLUMBER!) "I think if we share the wealth then it's better for everybody"
I totally agree. He's the fucking PRESIDENT. He can implement shit that no other man in America can.
Look what Bush accomplished in his 8 years! *snicker* Just IMAGINE what a good, decent man like Obama could do. (THAT HE ISN'T).
They say in 40 years our population will double. It's not sustainable.
If the current population is being downsized and laid off and out-sourced, what's gonna happen in 30-40 years????
All these new babies being pumped out by a human race that just Can't. Stop. Fuckin' are gonna find themselves at war just to get 2 meals a day, let alone a BMW or plasma TV...

It's not insensitive to say that the US is consumed by consumption. Canada is too. So are other countries.
If we still have people partying every friday night in L.A., New York, Miami and Chicago, despite the jobless and homeless everywhere, then it's more than appropriate to mention it. That goes for TV too. Even if they haven't a penny to their name, I bet they still watch the Simpsons. I bet they still buy Coca-cola or cigarettes or potato chips. CONSUMERS. without a dime. Isn't that remarkable?

[Chris Knipp]

My review on this thread of CALITALISM: A LOVE STORY from last year is here. (http://www.filmleaf.net/showthread.php?2565-Michael-Moore-Help-Save-Our-CEO-s&p=23036#post23036)

I do not think this is Moore's best film. He did better before. He picks the right moment to launch. BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE was effective, and SICKO was a good film that may have reached some new and sympathetic people. Perhaps by luck, CAPITALISM came at the time of the crash, or shortly after, so its timing was great for Moore too. But CALITALISM is focused on bombing easy targets, the CEOs and the big banks, he does not say what his real position is and has too little positive to propose. I wrote in my review:
The average guy sees the government bailouts as greed. Some progressive economists, such as Nobel laureate and NYTimes op-ed columnist Paul Krugman, have consistently argued that the bailouts were necessary; that they just haven't been bold and thorough enough. The concept that "the taxpayer" is paying for them is a little simplistic. In that sense we're all paying for everything. It's better to be saving the financial system than to be invading Iraq and Afghanistan and bombing Pakistan -- and it costs much less too.


Paul Krugman is not talking about bailouts now; not an issue at the moment. he is still pushing for bolder stimulus from the government and insisting that cutting deficits is a deadly plan and what we need is a bolder stimulus. He has said this again today. (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/06/opinion/06krugman.html?_r=1&ref=paulkrugman) It's true that finance should have greater constraints, just as the Army Corps of Engineers should have rebuilt stronger levees in New Orleans.

I'm disappointed in Obama (though not as much as some). But his leadership offers some hope. Only -- for the economy, is there hope now, given Obama's timidity and the political situation? Krugman wrote today:
Now, we weren’t supposed to find ourselves replaying the late 1930s. President Obama’s economists promised not to repeat the mistakes of 1937, when F.D.R. pulled back fiscal stimulus too soon. But by making his program too small and too short-lived, Mr. Obama did just that: the stimulus raised growth while it lasted, but it made only a small dent in unemployment — and now it’s fading out.

And just as some of us feared, the inadequacy of the administration’s initial economic plan has landed it — and the nation — in a political trap. More stimulus is desperately needed, but in the public’s eyes the failure of the initial program to deliver a convincing recovery has discredited government action to create jobs. It's a very tricky situation. And if only WWII really restored the American economy and not FDR's belated stiumuli, what hope is there of preventing a Japan-style decade-long slump for America now?

The "consumerism" line of attack is so pointless now. Are you attacking CEO's or ordinary citizens who just want labor saving gadgets in their house? Are you attacking rapacious anti-labor capitalism, or people buying stuff?

The elementary economics of today say what we need is a stimulus to the economy, which is in a worldwide slump. I am concerned about my future. I want to have enough to live on as I grow older. If people with empty wallets use their last few dollars to buy cigarettes or Coca Cola, I find that very natural.

[Johann]

Chris, you're a generation (or 2? :) ahead of mine.

Yes, Moore picks the right time to launch- everytime. He strikes when the iron is hot and it shouldn't be any other way.
It is his best film because it gives us an ominous ending to ROGER and ME.

The plant where Moore's Dad worked for 34 years is visited by father and son. (It's a scrap heap in the middle of Flint).
The only thing I could think of while watching that scene is "That's America". Exploit then Destroy.
That seems to be America's motto for All-Time.


You say that the timing was great for Moore. This isn't about him- just like how Shyamalan's films get attacked for the filmmaker, not the content- I attack the filmmaker when the movie's content is garbage. There is no garbage in Capitalism: A Love Story, except the corporate/government kind.
"Bombing easy targets"??
If he is, then he's the only one doing it.

I don't know Paul Krugman. Why should I listen to him?
Obama needs to be more aggressive. On many fronts. If he and his Admin really "HOPE" that America will change then he'd better start growing some Presidential balls. Bill Maher also *amazingly* said that Obama needs to act a little like George W. Bush, meaning, start walking tall and shitting on those who stand in your way. When Cheney was told that 70% of the American people were against the Iraq war he replied; "SO?"
Obama's too nice. You want a Legacy Barack? Good or Bad my friend?
Either way, start using your Presidential powers to truly make change. OH, you already ARE doing that? Coulda fooled me...
SHOW ME THE CHANGE!!

Tricky situation? Nothing tricky about it. Crush corporate America. Give back those campaign contributions from Goldman Sachs and all the other parasites of Greed. Lay down the Law!, say and do what is required!!! Take back America.
If you don't, then what we have today will look like a picnic in a few short years.
I was over the moon that Obama got elected. OVER THE MOON.
I was the first person to endorse him on this website. Long before he was even on the RADAR I endorsed him because I liked what he had to say.
Remember that? LONG before he was even on the Democratic leadership ticket I said I liked him.
He seemed like a solid, GOOD, HONEST man. When you are beholden to Goldman Sachs (of all corporations!), you no longer have my endorsement. My support vanished into thin air when I realized he took the bait from major corporations. I thought he was truly above that shit.

How awesome would it have been to have a BLACK man return the United States to the nation it intended to be?
I think Obama knew it too...he loves Lincoln....WHAT THE FUCK HAPPENED?? Goldman sachs happened.
Campaign donations happened. And then the chains were draped all over his body when he was sworn in.

Hunter S. Thompson prophesized before he pulled the trigger that the years we are currently living in "will be known as THE GREY AREA"
And that's what we have.
This is THE GREY DECADE.
Nobody knows jack shit and everybody likes it that way.

[Chris Knipp]

Yes we are several generations apart and it shows. You are rash and extreme and you are often not taking the long view or being constructive in any observable way. I too am very disappointed with Obama, as I am always saying. Even though I did not expect what the wide eyed public did. But it seems to me pointless to focus ceaselessly on only the negative aspects of his actions. I am watching for the positive ones he is taking specifically on the various points I have listed on our Lounge thread discussion. And they exist. And there is hope in that.

I don't know Paul Krugman. Why should I listen to him? I have provided numerous links to his NY Times op ed column for you to get to know him. If you still don't, it's not my fault. He is a Nobel laureate economist who teachers at Princeton and writes that weekly column, in which he does not entertain but says what he thinks are the most important things to say at that moment in time. You should listen to him because I say you should -- and because he is one of the smartest and clearest writers on the economy right now.



Tricky situation? Nothing tricky about it. Crush corporate America That seems to me a pretty thoughtless thing to say, to be completely honest. It's an easy thing to say, and it may give you some satisfaction to say it. But the trouble is that corporate America, as you call it, is also the economy, is also American employment. Guide, correct, discipline, educate, regulate, humanize corporate America, don't crush it. Crush it and you throw out the baby with the bath.

[Johann]

I "enjoy my rants"? Far from it. To prove without question that I hate ranting you'll never see me type another one.
I thought my rants helped others to understand. I was wrong. You'll never hear me rant again

The "long view"? What exactly would that be, if it's not the fact that the "economy" is hanging by a thread?
What other "LONG VIEW" is there?!?
Corporations should be crushed. In fact I'll go one further: MONEY should be crushed.
But we are so weak as a species that we'll go down fighting for our greed. "No money" is truly a pipe dream.
People would rather DIE than part with money. And they do. And they should. It's fitting.

How about a society that rewards farmers?
How about a society that "takes what it needs and leaves the rest"- (thanks to the BAND!)
How about totally transparent bank accounts?
Can you possibly imagine a system where everybody knows exactly how much everybody else makes?
Michael Moore shows it in his film. He shows a co-operatively owned multi-million dollar business where every employee knows how much everyone else makes- and guess what??? THEY MAKE MORE MONEY BECAUSE OF IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You'd have no crime then- you'd eliminate it simply by giving a person no reason to not believe he's being treated fairly.
Remember that scene in Capitalism:A Love Story where a US group of bread bakers make $60,000 a year each and have the same wage and benefits as the owner/CEO? and if they work more, THEY GET MORE MONEY!
What a concept!
Fixing this problem is not tricky at all to me.
It's plain as day what needs to happen.
But Greed trumps.
Money beats SOUL.
EVERYTIME. (thanks Jim)

[Chris Knipp]

Fixing this problem is not tricky at all to me.

No, because you don't have to do the fixing, and you never go into details.

[Johann]

Yes we are several generations apart and it shows. You are rash and extreme and you are often not taking the long view or being constructive in any observable way.

If I were to be REALLY rash, I would say that my generation is cleaning up your generations' mess. The aged and wise members of Congress have lived much longer on this planet than me. They understand the problems of this world much better than I do, don't they?
They have the mileage.
They have the expertise.
They have the years in the trenches, RIGHT?

Why are they leaving the young with such an abysmal mess to clean up?
The Treasury was already emptied when Bush was in office- his Admin looted it.
So the bailout?
That was a loan from your great--great- grandkids AMERICA!
You love your children and grand children so much that you DOOM THEM?

THAT'S INSENSITIVE.

THAT'S NOT TAKING THE LONG VIEW.

[Johann]

I'd love to do the fixing, but you can't do it alone with a billion complacent, debt-ridden, capitalist-bred people who are treacherous even when they try to make good.
I'm a positive guy believe it or not.
My ranting is the pure expression of frustration with the status quo, which is so horrifyingly askewed that you just give up.
Why fight it?
It's all moot. You get temporary breathers and that's it.
"Take what you can get" is the Mantra nowadays and if you're happy with that, fine. I'm not.

I can imagine a clean planet, teeming with fish to eat, teeming with plants to eat, with gorgeous sunsets and sunrises and NO MONEY.

"Wouldn't it be nice if we could wake up..."

I can't go to the Bahamas or Easter Island unless I have a passport ($) or stay in a hotel ($) or take an airplane ride ($) or tip the bellhop ($$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$)

Even if I made my own boat and had a map- STILL CAN'T GO. This ain't my planet and I'm not particularly proud to live here.
Just passing through. I'm hoping my next life will have more passionate peeps with NO FEAR to hang around with...

[Johann]

I'll say it again: Capitalism is Moore's best film because it bookends his 22-year old film ROGER AND ME.

You have plain-as-day evidence of how America has progressed, even from 1988. A lot of towns and cities have turned into Flint Michigan.
Jobs go to Mexico and China. Shouldn't THAT anger a patriot? Buy American? OK, I would but everything is made in China! Help!

"America" is all mental. It's all in your head. Nations are an IDEA, not a reality. "Canada" is an idea.
If they were real and True, then my country would have an Army that I would serve in and fight with proudly.
We would still have a giant surplus, not a crippling deficit that made us de Facto the 51st state.
Stephen Harper's greatest legacy is to make Canada as poor as the United States, all the while ticking off his elite "to-do list"

I'm way beyond caring whether anyone agrees with me or not.
I know what I know and say what I say because it's sickening to have to endure such evil.
I know full well what's going on and while there's a lot I love about America and the world (culturally speaking) I simply must express my disgust.
People just don't care. I understand that. I understand your fear. I understand that you must belive the system is GOOD, despite you being victimized by it repeatedly. Choose your propaganda carefully...

[Chris Knipp]

I can't really reply to all this. You're blasting out salvos before I can even answer. One at a time, please.
You have taken over this thread (of course you started it, but it's not a "Lounge" free discussion thread but is meant to be about a specific film.) . It falsifies Michael Moore's very real achievement.

ROGER AND ME was a fine statement of the working man and corporate indifference, certainly foretelling the current message, and also defining Moore's personal style of intrusive, shoot-from-the-hip filmmaking.

BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE was a stunning depiction of the US love of violence, perhaps a bit too eagerly celebrated by Europe (the big prize at Cannes) but a wake-up call.

FARHRNHEIT was a failed attempt to keep Bush from being reelected. It was heartening to me, but it went over too-familiar ground, preached to the converted, and also covered material dealt with better in various other docs. Not Moore's best work.

SICK was a great polemical documentary indictment of the US medical care system that contained much information new to the general public and came at a good time (as most of his films do, as I said)

CAPITALISM: A LOVE STORY, the titles itself a misfire, is his most feeble major effort, containing dubious claims, full of stuff everybody knows and again, like Fahrenheit 911, overlapping topics dealt with in smarter, more incisive docs before it.

The ratings, awards or nominations, and critical consensus on these various films correspond with my evaluations. I'm not being original here. ROGER AND ME doesn't have a Metacritic rating, but the others are COMUMBINE, 72; FAHRENHEIT, 67; SICKO, 74; and CAPITALISM, 61. They all got a lot of nominations and awards but CAPITALISM is mostly nominations except Venice, where it got a Little Golden Lion, whatever that means.

I think you are falsifying Moore's very real achievement as a filmmaker by overpraising this latest film within his oeuvre and using it as a starting point for a monologue about all that's wrong with the world, with the older generation, and with politics and economics in particular (not very particular, since you speak in vague generalizations). Remember, Johan, we tend to agree very much on political issues. Just because we disagree on Moore's economics and politics as presented in CAPITALISM and on your analysis of the film is not reason to turn this into a confrontation between us or our generations. Every generation has geniuses, plodders, assholes, and saints. Let's not draw artificial lines here, please.

Given the relative lack of success of FAHRENHEIT 911 and CAPITALISM, it seems Moore has not done as well on the broad political and economic situation as he has done dealing with less general issues or ones seen in more specific and personal terms like his dad's job in Flint, Michigan; a school tragedy and American's romance with weapons; sick people getting a raw deal in the US and a good deal in France, Cuba, etc.

[Johann]

My thread "Falsifies Moore's real achievement"?
Overpraising?

Um, let's get something clear here. At least I understand what he's achieved. You don't. You trash the "relative success"?
The only "relative success" that needs to be remembered is that these films even exist.
Who cares if Bush wasn't removed? Moore showed the PLANET who he is and why he was a psychopath.
It's a permanent record. Anyone can see it.
That this man had the balls and the pure outrage at his country to say something with the most powerful medium in the world is enough of a sucess.
You don't have to judge a man past his actions.

Who cares if health care is SICKO in the States? Moore showed you how and why and what can be done to change it.
Fuck America if it doesn't listen.
Who cares if guns are everywhere in America and you can even get one for opening a bank account? Moore showed how wacked-out that is, and how maybe we shouldn't be so surprised when horrible events like Columbine happen.

Capitalism: A love Story shows how we're all "living the dream", LITERALLY. This is ominous, this tender financial situation.
This is more important than Moore's other films and I'm astonished you can't see that.
You can tell by watching it that he was going for broke, Moore was making the film that would get him blacklisted FOREVER, maybe even shot.
Watch the film again Chris and then tell me that the info contained therein is useless, uneffective.

I think it's a little insensitive to call a film that highlights people being destroyed emotionally and financially "not his best. he's done better".
That's ignorance, to be quite honest.
How can you ignore what the bailout was? a HEIST. By Goldman Sachs. THE CEO MADE IT HAPPEN. It's painfully and clearly shown how it happened in Moore's film. No change has come to America. Just a switch of puppets.

I've actually had enough of discussing this. If I took over this conversation it's because we have no members here.
The discourse is limited here, isn't it?

[Chris Knipp]

In this post, you seem to me to be confusing the subject matter with Moore's films. The fact that (perhaps) the dangerous course of American capitalism may be more important than the bad state of the US health care sustem, or American violence fostered by over-availability of weapons, or the damage done by the Bush administration post-September 11th, does not make CAPITALISM: A LOVE STORY a more successful film than his others. You scoff at the idea that Moore's films have different degrees of "relative success." But I think they do and it would be odd if they were all on an exact par. However, Moore has made the most seen, highest grossing documentary films thus far and put documentaries on the mainstream map as never before. I was wrong on FAHRENHEIT 9/11 in implying that it was not a big popular success (If I did imply that). It was the biggest success of all. I hadn't realized that.

Grosses:
ROGER AND ME: $6.7 million
BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE: $58 million
FAHRENHEIT 9/11: $120 million in the US, $220 million worldwide
SICKO: $24 million
CAPITALISM: $17.4 million

Needless to say gross, success artistically as a film, and that vague concept of "importance" are not equivalent but these figures are an indication of the public impact of the films.

I find it a bit odd that you resort to the rhetorical flourish "Who cares if..." in defending the films (which really don't need defending: I'm not "trashing" them, only dsicussing their relative success and merits). I.e., "Who cares if the US health system is SICKO?" "Who cares if Bush wasn't removed?" (I'd have said "reelected.") Well, I care. Quite a lot, actually. So that's an extreme way of making your point. Of course Moore's films aren't failures because they don't change the world. But it is an issue worth considering, since he seeks to change the world, doesn't he?

Moore has had a big impact, but his main impact may have been in making the general public ready to go out and watch a documentary film.

I just meant you "took over" the discussion in the sense that you wrote three posts before I could answer one. We're the only two discussing.

[Johann]

"Success" is actually the wrong word to use.
Thank you for posting Moore's box office numbers.

What do we learn from those numbers? That the WORLD hated George W. Bush (or at least had an interest in his shenanigans) if that film made $220 million. I guess everybody cared more about him than health care or capitalism?

Of course people care about Bush not getting booted or health care. I used "who Cares" to illustrate that Moore's achievements do not rest on whether or not he solved these huge problems.

The fact is he's got a brilliant, relevant point, with each film.
But no one does anything to help change it. lazy or ignorant or just DUMB, the people won't change a damn thing.
And as it was said in Capitalism: A Love Story, the people won't rebel until there is nothing left to do BUT REBEL.
So I guess the bottom HAS to fall out of the economy.
Bombs have to rain down.
People must lose their houses and lifestyles inorder to get a backbone and say "HEY! FUCK THIS!"

[Johann]

Another salvo for you Chris.
(What can I say, I've been watching Yamato a lot lately. When ya mix Yamato and a Michael Moore film, it gets wierd Mama..LOL)


Everyone is guilty of ignorance. Me. you. Every F'n SOUL on earth. We all can do so much better and we don't.
We could have paradise on earth. We fight amongst ourselves for what? Fear? The Dollar?
Yikes.

It's so simple and yet it's so frustrating.
There is so much fantastic shit on this planet:
Movies. Music. (music is a miracle. Nobody can say music is not a fucking Miracle).
Books.
Angora sweaters.
Dairy Queen ice cream cakes.
White Widow spliffs.
Greg Norman's cabernet merlot.
Foot massages.
back rubs.
Hot baths.
a cup of coffee in the morning while listening to Megadeth's "KILL THE KING"
sleeping in.
three matinees in a row
Lindt chocolate
Crown Royal.
Dogs.
Cats.
Horses.

You get my point.

[Johann]

And one of the best things about Moore's film was IGGY POP wailing "LOUIE LOUIE" over the opening credits.
(with the lyrics changed just a smidge).

Michael Moore is fucking COOL, you dig?

You hate on Mike Moore and you might as well hate on your Grandma...lol