New World Record!

I usually leave the movie reviewing to my brother the film specialist extraordinaire. But here is one film critique that is less about the quality of the film (nice editing and camera work, Mr. Director) and more about the [lack of] credibility.

First let me start by saying I don't think all liberals (progressives or democrats or whatever you want to call yourselves) are dumb, stupid, illiterate, opportunistic, lying sacks of gluten, rubber, marshmallow cream, and mayonnaise.

I need the hotline for the Guinness Book of World Records stat! I just witnessed the biggest pile of horse manure ever captured on film. Yes the former world record holder (a film called Sicko) was beaten by the ironically titled Capitalism: A Love Story (hehe so clever!). Obviously the title is just Moore doing what he does best, being humorously glib about the evil corporate conspirators running Washington.

I wonder, does it get harder and harder to blame Reagan and Bush for every factory worker's plight in Flint, Michigan? Not when you're this good at inventing theories of conspiracy.

Like all of Moore's documentaries, he has a ram-fisted agenda. He sums this one up easily enough for us: capitalism is bad and should be replaced by "democracy," whatever that means. He actually literally means socialism, but for some reason thinks capitalism and democracy have to be at odds with each other.

Now I am not a proponent of communist witch hunts, but when someone puts on the pointy hat, shouts a Shakespearian curse, boils a newt, predicts the future from chicken bones, and shouts "I'll get you my pretty!" well you know. Besides I generally admire the passion of real socialists, the idealists (FYI Michael Moore doesn't get to make my list of favorite Marxists). People have a right to have socialist thoughts free of capitalist reprisal. They are totally free to want to take over factories from the bourgeois (or whatever Moore calls big businesses). Seriously I mean it (honest injun). I know I kid about Obama being a commie, though he is a very soft kind of socialist who only wants to socialize healthcare (while buying banks a piece at a time) and villainizing the oil industry. But Moore is the real deal.

This film is just a big bag of contradicting confetti.

In the Love Story, Moore holds up the poor bourgeoisie to this pedestal while simultaneously painting anyone who makes a lot of moola as the devil incarnate, yet somehow with all the success of his documentaries, I don't quite know if he qualifies as one of America's untouchables. He criticizes anyone who would profit from the suffering of Flint, Michigan's sob stories. Not like he is directly gaining anything from his home town's misery (Roger and Me, Fahrenheit 911, Sicko =
chuuuuching!). He of course, is ironically the best paid socialist in America that I know of.

But enough about his socialist inclinations. If you are prone to ulcers of the heart, you should refrain from watching this film. It is filled with sob story after sob story of people who were given loans by the bank then could no longer pay their mortgage and were evicted. I hate to sound like the mean old man from It's a Wonderful Life (and by hate I mean I wish I hated sounding like him) but "so?" What are the banks supposed to do? Moore seems to think they should be allowed to live there for free. I wish I could get a free house too. How about free groceries and a free car. Beep that. That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard of.

For example, his old Catholic priest says being rich is a sin. Not to get into a Biblical debate with an obvious moron, but doesn't God reward his best servants in the Bible with riches? Guess someone was sick that day in seminary.

Yeah, whatever. If money is so evil then why does Moore want the people to be financially well off? If being poor is soooo much better as he purports in the film, then why is he trying to get his greasy sausage fingers on the money so bad? Poor people should count their blessings for being broke!

My favorite part. Moore tries to find out what derivatives are but is unable to understand the concept. So here we have a guy who openly admits he has no frigging clue what he is even criticizing. Then he criticizes a Harvard professor for not being able to spell it out in terms simple enough for Moore to understand (are you as shocked as I am that Moore dropped out of college?). He then admonished Wall Street for purposefully making the math difficult to understand so we wouldn't get it (though Rachel assures me it's not hard if you took college math).

Bah. I am sure if I really got into, I could talk about how incredibly bull puckish this movie is all day. I don't even know why I would bother. It's like pointing out that the ocean is wet.

By the way, the ocean is wet.