Yes, that's right, it's a comedic take on serious political facts and ideas... do you guys not have satire in the US? You seem not to have gotten the point:

"This is the challenge of Moore's work -- is he a journalist, or an entertainer? A fact-finding seeker of truth or a deadpan comedian of the socially absurd?"

BOTH. That's the whole point. It's entertainment and journalism.

Reply

Michael Moore is a punk. Whether you love him or hate him, at least he's standing up and saying "F**k this!" to all the crap going on in our country. I wish more people could get past their media-influenced opinion of him and watch his films.

Reply

The problem is that, because Moore's persona and the way he frames his arguments are so objectionable, the "entertainment" aspect of his films undercuts the journalism. And I say that despite the fact that I agree with many of the points he makes.

Take his "donation" of money so the anti-Moore blogger could take care of his wife. To me, this just reeks of a rich person using his wealth to exploit a not-rich person at a vulnerable time. It certainly wasn't done out of generosity. Instead of proving a point about healthcare, it just makes Moore look like a jerk.

I will say that Moore is actually right about the myriad conditions that can make someone ineligible for private insurance. When I was self-employed, I applied to one of the largest insurance companies and was turned down because, despite my overall excellent health, I take an allergy medication for hay fever. Another company accepted me, but I still paid more than $500 a month for coverage that included large deductibles and many exceptions.

So I'm glad that someone is making what's sure to be a much-seen documentary on an important topic. I just wish it was someone who cared more about convincing people who disagree with him than providing self-congratulatory entertainment for those who already share his views.

Reply

"Much of Sicko revolves around how other nations have "free universal health care" -- but it takes Moore an hour-and-a-half to explain that actually, citizens of those nations pay for their health care through their taxes. "

You say this like it's a bad thing. Of course we (in Australia) pay through our taxes, because that means that when we have no job or we aren't earning enough to pay tax ourselves... we are still covered. It's a system that looks after EVERYONE and only those who can afford it pay for it.

The thought of having no public healthcare is terrifying to me - Moore does sound like he could use a bit of education in proper debate and documentary style, but I'm glad to hear someone so prominent questioning the system.

Reply

Good for him that his film has made it to Cannes.I can't wait to see it and probably won't be disappointed. It's hard to find humour in the dispaging situation of Us. Healthcare, which is only available for those who can afford it. And a sorry comment on the federal gov't. who condons such a practise and ignoring those below the table who are homeless and ill.
I don't think the founding Fathers had it in mind to deny everyone one the right to good health and reasonable healthcare. Power to him for putting out the Word. A frustrated Dual-citizen.

Reply

I can't even talk... Ok, I can talk. Your take on the film is just so narrow minded and shallow, and stupid! That's it, your just stupid! Obviously you don't understand the art of persuasion, and how your own country feels or sees itself! How could you be so off the mark? A serious film in your country about serious things? Where is your young voting public? What's their favorite shows? Who do they look up to? In a general sense you moron, where's the majority of them when it comes time to vote? How did you get your job? Who's your uncle? How the fuck? Where have you been for the last, oh I don't know, half a decade? Pull your head out of the sand and look around! So all entertainment has to be just that, entertainment? So, have to tell a sad story only in a serious light? He's making fun of idiots because it's just too easy, his audience gets it and they feel the same way, totally serrounded by madness! Total and unabashed stupidity! How could you not see the total absurdity, the total insanity, the total hilarity at what is going on behind everyones back? 64 percent of human beings automatically comply with authority! That's a fact! Automatically! And they also automatically resent and are challenged by anyone who doesn't follow suit! You also have 4 percent of your society who is sociopaths! that's almost 13 million people in your country alone! And guess where they are, in the churches, in the media, in the white house, in every place you find people they're there! Have you ever hear of the saying a little sugar makes the medicine go down? Well the medicine, in this case, is humor you idiot! Humor makes the absence of medicine go down moron! MOron! Moron! Moron!

Reply

"...your just stupid!"

Indeed.

Reply

I have seen all of Moore's movies up to "Sicko". I will see it also. After watching and reading interviews with Moore for many years, in addition to seeing his movies, it is obvious to me that he is a self-congratulatory egomaniac, a man who revels in his David vs Goliath view of the world, to the point of sometime seeming disingenuous.

The more important point, I believe, is that sometimes great artists must be forgiven their sins when they are creating their art. Particularly if their work matters to the masses. Moore's certainly does. If you watch the documentary that brought him to prominence, "Roger and Me", you will see and begin to understand the blatantly corrupt corporate culture that has become commonplace in American society.

Think what you want about Moore. But his voice has become an important one in the United States. The mere fact that he has so many detractors speaks to the relecance of his work. In any free and Democratic society, there must be those who will speak to the inevitable crime, corruption, excess, and fraud that accompanies it. Moore does just that.

I don't care how great a fortune Michael Moore has amassed. He speaks for those who have been victimized by corporate America, and a govt that has run amok. And that matters.

Reply

It is quite easy to spot the personal bias of certain commentators. Quite obviously Moore dislikes certain things and is quick to bring them to the attention of the viewer. Some may argue that his style is "underhanded," or "dishonest." However, it seems that he doesn't really attempt to hide what he is saying or how he is saying it.
Reviews like this fall neatly into the same category as Moore. This reviewer however, attempts to hide his personal dislike of the man with a critique of his art. It is a poor attempt in my opinion. Perhaps the reviewer dislikes Moore's point of view, but the nitpicking over certain well known facts (such as European taxes paying for health care) are as weak. It may be that the review overall is negative just to be contrary, or created to meet a deadline. Who knows? Who cares really at this point. This reviewer now falls into the category of the pundits that contribute nothing, as opposed to Moore who at least makes it somewhat entertaining.

Reply

I can't speak to the movie, but I can speak to your question of costs. When stacked up against other developed countries, we pay twice as much for our system on average for outcomes that are worse. If he didn't do a good job of explaining this, then he did fail as a journalist, however funny the movie was. This single point that we are a paying twice as much for less benefits rather than more needs to be hammered again and again. I don't pretend to know what the solution is, but with health insurance costs rising at hyperinflationary double digit percentage rates (mines went up 15 percent last year and 12 percent the year before), this system, especially with its approach of excluding the sick, isn't sustainable. Perhaps some state based rather federal system is preferable or some other similar structure?

Reply

This says it all -
http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/c/my/u/unh
United Health care's stock performance.

If they can get away with raising premiums at double digit rates each year without anyone complaining, then who can blame them. It sucks that our company doesn't really give us any other meaningful options so we are forced to play along.

Reply

The reviewer hasn't even noticed that the review is all about their own political position and not about the film. That's the beauty of Moore's work, that he stimulates the viewer into political thought. And that's a good thing even where, as here, the political thought produced doesn't get beyond standard holier-than-thou banalities.

Reply

I haven't had health care coverage for years. I've been living in poverty ever since I lost my full-time job, not long after Bush first got elected. I had outside coverage for about half a year, paying over $600 for it. When I actually tried to use it, I was offered only $2 compensation from the insurance company. So, in effect, they were willing to give me $2 dollars back from the $660 I had given them. I dropped their coverage, and now I have no coverage. I told my parents that if I get cancer or a heart attack, not to pay a cent for it, but to let me go bankrupt, since I don't want them legally assuming my debt and losing their house. The irony is that I am going to school to change careers as a medical professional and I've interned in the hospital without my own health care cover, like many other students in class.

Reply

But Americans also pay for health care through their taxes, and in fact they pay more in taxes for their horrendously patchy system than the citizens of most countries pay for universal coverage, and then pay more than that again on top for private coverage.

Reply

Here in the United Kingdom we complain about our health service but it makes me laugh to see US hospital programmes and the attention their patients get when I know perfectly well that unless they could pay fortunes for this treatment they wouldn't be there. Michael Moore is right to mix politics with health insurance for they are typical of attitudes in America where profit is all, still,and the poor are despised and discarded.

Reply

"... your stupid."

It's actually you're stupid. If we are going to call out others and try to make any kind of change, let's use proper English, shall we.

Reply

Heidi: Actually, the hospitals in "House" and "Grey's Anatomy" both offer free clinics staffed by their best doctors, while "E.R." takes place in a county hospital serving a largely low-income community. Such is the magic of television.

Reply

Instead of responding the the issues in Moore's film this review spends the majority of his time questioning Moore's method of delivering a message. What the reviewer doesn't seem to get is that Moore uses humor to disarm his audience, no matter what belief systems they hold. This is why Republicans and Independants find his films entertaining, even if they don't agree with the message. Humor levels the playing field and Moore is much more than a class clown-- he uses irony to deliver a message. Watch Fox news's attempts at humor and you will see what happens when a humorist takes only one side. It is only fun to one side and it is a mean kind of humor. Moore's humor has more spirit and embraces a larger audience.

Reply

One thing that I would like to point out is by being entertaining Moore gets his message across to more people. How many more people will see Sicko than a PBS documentary that contained the same information?

Reply

Two comments:

1. Has no one mentioned that those of us who pay huges amounts of money for private health insurance foot the bill for all the people who are treated free in America? Yes, it is illegal to turn away anyone from emergency care....no charge.

2. Americans pay dearly for pharmaceuticals which, by the way, fund development of new meds and treatments for the rest of the world to enjoy at cut rates.

It is not perfect, but we are not the anti-christ of health care delivery. Michael Moore might do well to take a closer look.

Fran, USA

Reply