At the risk of being a polarizing figure right off the bat, I'm going to review Michael Moore's 'Sicko,' but there might be a bit of my own personal feelings in there as well. It's not that I planned this, it's just that I happened to see the film today, and it's the first thing I've watched since signing up at Spout.
Since 'Fahrenheit 9/11' came out, Michael Moore probably doesn't need an introduction. Some love him and some hate him, but does that relate to the quality of his films? I have watched Moore ever since seeing 'Roger & Me' on video and being impressed with his particular ability to highlight the absurdity of real life and his firm grasp of film language which results in very compelling and emotionally charged films. His new film, 'Sicko,' is in many ways is obviously of the same pedigree, but other subtle things (good and bad) set this one apart.
'Sicko' is possibly the most straight-forward presentation Moore has ever made on film. The stories here flow pretty smoothly from point-to-point, without as many of the digressions or stunts epitomized by, say, 'Bowling For Columbine.' The structure here is pretty much 1) show examples of insured Americans who have been wronged by HMOs, 2) provide evidence that the HMO's incentive is monetary rather than health-based and 3) show positive examples of "universal health care" programs and propose something similar as an alternative to HMOs.
Michael Moore is surprisingly restrained throughout 'Sicko.' In fact, the most emphatic use of Moore's clout to spur change in the film actually comes from an average guy invoking Moore's name (without permission) to his insurance company. In a sense, this restraint robs the film of the mischievous tone found in Moore's other work, but it also serves to underline the seriousness of the issue. In fact, Moore may have gone a bit too far on the seriousness. The narration often comes across as cloying, which is not helped by the overly emotional music that underscores the scenes. There are a number of nice songs sprinkled throughout, but nothing that lives up to Moore's brilliant use of songs as counterpoint to his scenes in previous films (for instance, "Wouldn't It Be Nice" in 'Roger & Me').
Detractors of Michael Moore have a lot of complaints about his methods, and I agree with some of them. Moore always contends the facts in his film are 100% accurate. This, I choose not to argue, but Moore's strength has always been based on what he says in between those facts. He is a master at implying the ideas he wants you to take away from his films. On this point, I think 'Sicko' makes stronger arguments than Moore's other works, therefore the film feels stronger, despite the missteps. At the screening I attended, the theater was far from packed, but the film earned a round of applause from the audience.
This is where my personal opinion comes in, however. Now that Moore is in such a position that his commentaries on the United States health care system can be considered influential, I think he needs to consider the impact of his methods on the state of political discourse. As pointed out in one of my favorite films of last year, 'Thank You For Smoking,' one never needs to succesfully argue their point of view as long as they can make the other side's argument look bad, which is a cheat - just because the other guy is wrong doesn't automatically make you right. Moore is sometimes guilty of this (witness his recent tirade on CNN, which does little for factual journalism, but does plenty for stirring up free publicity). The ethical question, regardless of whether you agree or disagree with Moore, is about the fairness of the methods. I don't like a lot of television and radio personalities (who intentionally blur the line between 'journalist' and 'commentator') because their opinions are seething with distrust and superiority, and Moore is coming off like that sometimes instead of taking the high road. It makes it difficult to expand his influence beyond his core audience. And in this case, 'Sicko' probably has the most univerally appealing idea, thus the most to lose.