"Capitalism" opens with disclaimer from some old film, and then segues into scenes from police videos of people robbing banks and convenience stores. Moore likes to make comparisons. In this case he wants to show us who the real thieves are, and they don't tend to be desperate drug addicts wearing hoodies.To me that's what Moore's latest film is: a cinematic treatise on crime. Moore uses his excellent skills as an editor to piece together films in a manner that makes you want to scream "Where does he find this stuff?" to paint a telling picture of what America is: a plutocracy. And yes, Mike uses that word and wants us all to learn it, even providing a definition straight out of a textbook.
What Moore also excels at is humanizing crises and the class war by showing us just who's affected by these forces and why. We're shown people, real people being thrown out of their homes, being pushed out of their jobs, being paid meager salaries to do dangerous, complicated work, and being informed that companies profited from the deaths of their loved ones through something called "dead peasant insurance."
He even speaks to various clergy to try and find any sort of modern moral justification for capitalism. He can't. One priest even goes as far as to state flatly that "Capitalism is radically evil."
Yeah.
Speaking of all things radical, Moore puts himself on the line by trying to raid the offices of financial institutions, implores us to do the same, and backs that strategy up by showing current examples of how dissent and popular revolt can turn the tables on the gluttons in power, even if those victories are as small as one family being allowed to stay in their foreclosed home and window factory workers given severance payments after a long sit-in.
However, what "Capitalism" isn't is a mere bleeding-heart piece that is all emotion. Mike tends to do his homework. And that's what makes him a firebrand. The evidence is laid bare for the viewer to see.
There are some who would call Michael Moore and his documentaries "anti-American." He's even told by one Wall Streeter to "stop making movies" when trying to get an accurate definition of what are called "derivatives." Although I would definitely call Moore a subversive, I challenge anyone to find an ounce of hatred towards America in this piece. No, Michael Moore loves America, but his America is made up of those who toil and have little or nothing. His America is being looted by people that can only be described as white-collar sociopaths who would be selling heroin or whoring out young girls had they not been brought up in wealthy families.
You also get a generous serving of Michael's trademark humor to make it all go down easier. It has been said that the best way to take the powerful down a peg or two is by poking fun at them, and Moore doesn't just poke at them, he runs them through with swords of bitingly comedic steel.
If I had one gripe about "Capitalism" it would be that there was so much more ground that could have been covered. That's why I feel that a sequel is in order as well as a prequel since Moore rather glosses over earlier American history. But I suppose that's what he have Howard Zinn for.
Yes, this is a paramount polemic against capitalism and dare I say FOR socialism. Even Bernie Sanders gets some facetime.
As someone who has been identifying as a socialist for years, I can say that it only reinforced my belief that the free market is unsustainable, as if my personal experience as an American worker hasn't been enough to do so. Demons lurk in the details though, and Moore not only shines a light of veracity on them, he also splashes them with holy water, as any left-leaning Catholic such as Moore would.
Christ wasn't a capitalist sympathizer, something Moore also shows us, and neither is Moore himself. So why should you be? It's not in your best interests to be one. Think of this as an intervention by way of motion picture for your friends and family who are thoroughly in love with an abusive spouse that is all take and no give.
Talk about a great candidate for an ABC Sunday Night Movie. If I could hold screenings for "Capitalism" I would. It needs to be seen by far more people than any action/adventure blockbuster.
Thanks for makin' the devils hiss, Mike. And for making socialism taste so good.
Buy Capitalism: A Love Story (2009) Now
This movie is absolutely wonderful. It is funny from the beginning to the end, yet "delightfully serious" at the same time (note the paradox). It is very unfortunate that this movie did not get the acclaim that it should have. More people should see it. It opens our minds and our hearts to the fact that capitalism is at the bottom of all this. Right in front of our eyes "capitalism" says that profit is more important than human need. How could this be? Is it more important for someone to make a profit or to give a needed operation to a sick child? Moore's attention to fundamental Judaic-Christian-Islamic values ultimately, that emphasize duties to one another and to "do things to the least of these" is noteworthy and refreshing. It is as if such fundamental spiritual wisdom has become lost. How unfortunate! It is a very moving film, especially toward the end when he has President Roosevelt give his famous Four Freedoms speech. In the mid 20th century, the US was such a moral leader. What happened? The movie could have been enhanced if Mr. Moore then spoke about the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which to a large degree is a legacy of Roosevelt's Four Freedoms. The Universal Declaration, which includes rights to worship, rights to work, health care, adequate shelter, and security in old age, is now increasingly referred to as customary international law, which all nations must abide. In any event, this movie will definitely give us something to think about.Read Best Reviews of Capitalism: A Love Story (2009) Here
The short list of what can be considered documentary film classics has yet another wonderful addition by legendary filmmaker Michael Moore. It is a visual spanning of the history of corporate influence over our political leaders and how this has poisoned the entire establishment nearly beyond repair. I will never forget the segment of a presidential speech, showed roughly around the beginning of this film, of a man standing behind president Reagan who leans in and says angrily in his ear: "HURRY IT UP; WE DON'T HAVE ALL DAY!" The camera then freezes on Reagan's shocked face as the narrator simply asks, "Who speaks to the president like this?" It graphically shows you how much influence is measured by the corporations over our political leaders. This film in particular strikes higher notes than Moore's previous films in that it takes you back to the roots of earlier documentaries and brings out more ample and articulate forms of evidence in support of the general thesis. Capitalism: A Love Story seeks to expose the corruption of our varied form of greedy Capitalism, and to replace it with a more democratized base system, typically referred to as Leftist-Libertarianism or Libertarian-Socialism.People in the United States generally speak of Socialism as something awful, pointing to Russia and China as examples of the dangers of far leftist thought. But if they would simply take the time to read into some of their literature of political theory, they would realize that there are branches within the movement which are infinitely distinct from those totalitarian nations. It is a category mistake to assume that socialism entails totalitarianism, as if what you see in Russia and China were totally across the board. To any of you interested in getting a thorough education on this subject, I would recommend you checking out the following books: Anarchism: From Theory to Practice Chomsky on Anarchism
Want Capitalism: A Love Story (2009) Discount?
Cut away the pro-union, pro-New Deal mushiness and Michael Moore's "Capitalism, A Love Story" has a vital core worth considering. Twenty years after "Roger and Me," Moore shows he still has pop on his filmmaking fastball. At every point where I was ready to write off "Capitalism" as a fruitcake leftist screed, the writer/director/actor dug up a fresh angle I couldn't ignore. Unless you're on the board of Goldman Sachs, director of the George W. Bush Presidential Library, or both you'll likely conclude that "Capitalism, A Love Story" is a balanced movie.The film is testament to Kevin Spacey's 2009 comment about the arts being a necessity during a time of economic crisis. Hundreds of newscasts don't register on the mind and soul the way Moore's art does in minutes.
Moore succeeds for the opposite reason that Tim Geithner fails up (fellow followers of the Mises/Austrian School see our exposition of the state and its purchased intellectuals affirmed by Moore in his take on Obama's Treasury secretary). Moore refuses to tell us what we want to hear or see. His brand of social criticism reminds me of one of Hillel's dictums in Judaism's Ethics of the Fathers (2:6) "...A person excessively involved in business cannot become a scholar and where there are no leaders strive to become a leader."
The artist is trying to put his finger on a big problem. While the moral poverty of the wealthy is a major issue it's far from the whole story. Moore's viewpoint is a blue-collar critic animated by Roman Catholic sentiment. After slogging through the beastly jungle to give us a new vantage point, the filmmaker ends his production with an appeal. This made me think that Moore wants "Capitalism, A Love Story" to fire people up and get them talking. If so, kudos to Moore.
Yet anecdotes and a rich-vs.-poor mindset will take us only so far. These things are emotionally compelling yet they can mislead. For example, Moore opines that one of the main reasons that Americans suffer the inequities of capitalism is because most want some day to be in that top 1 percent income bracket. This is a thought I've long harbored and I'm glad an artist of Moore's stature has put it out for public reflection. But this is far from a sufficient explanation and the film points toward that. When the Countrywide mortgage executive says "If I didn't do it someone else would have" we glimpse something of the enormity people aren't just morally lax; they desire to keep their jobs because of fears of letting their families down and losing the wealth that they have. This is not lost on Moore because elsewhere in the movie, in commenting on the 2008 pre-election bank bailout, he well surmises the power of fear.
Moore's shorthand in labeling economic and social injustice "capitalism" is likewise too simplistic. To call people losing their homes to foreclosure "capitalism" is like calling the mass murders under Hitler, Mao, and Stalin "socialism." The terminology is imprecise. These situations are social crises.
The filmmaker is right to see that business has gotten too big and impersonal. Although he's somewhat critical of government, Moore implies that big government (through more regulations and FDR-style proclamations of additional rights) will arrest the march of crony capitalism. His interviews with Roman Catholic clerics imply that big church might stop the raging bull of Wall Street. Funny that Moore begins his film comparing ancient Rome to modern America and leaves us with the impression that the form of Christianity bequeathed to us by the old empire is going to stop the slide of the United States. I'd like to say stranger things have happened but I can't think of anything stranger than this prospect.
Moore will come much closer to the truth by reviewing his movie and realizing that bigness is inherently corrupting. America's Protestant culture and heritage must also be taken proper account of. What will right America is a block-by-block revolution in thinking and action that prizes communal mindedness (to use a term from a teacher of mine, Rabbi Mayer Schiller), humility, and brims with an ethos of "small is beautiful." May this come soon in our days. If and when it does Michael Moore's "Capitalism, A Love Story" will be regarded as an important road sign on our journey there.
Save 75% Off
No comments:
Post a Comment