Drop Everything You’re Doing And Go See Michael Moore’s “Capitalism A Love Story”
I have to admit, when I first saw Michael Moore’s new film a couple weeks ago at a press screening, I wasn’t really all that impressed. The movie felt scatterbrained and poorly edited — I thought it was all over the place without really saying much.
It actually took a second screening — at the D.C. premiere of the film, where I had the honor to meet the filmmaker himself and attend a screening alongside the likes of Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) — that I really understood the power behind the movie.
I think the reason I wasn’t able to get into “Capitalism: A Love Story” the first go-round is because I was seeing it in a crowd of maybe twenty people, mostly film critics. There was little applause, and little feeling of solidarity. Watching it with a crowded house of D.C. progressive politicos, on the other hand, really made the movie shine. That’s because the film’s central theme — that we’re all being served poorly by an unfair economic system that has fabulously enriched a small minority at the expense of the rest of us — demands a crowd that is willing to invest itself in the film’s stories.
And stories are what the film is all about. Unlike some of Moore’s previous work — most notably Fahrenheit 9/11, which is basically a non-stop assault on former president George W. Bush — this film relies almost exclusively on various narratives that come together to tell the larger story of a savage economic system that has laid waste to the working class of the country.
The film opens with a montage of surveillance footage of robbers looting banks and convenience stores. As the opening credits roll, we watch as the sort of thieves and common criminals you’d recognize in an episode of Cops fill the screen, with one of Moore’s classic ironic soundtrack picks blaring in the background — it’s a sort of foreshadowing, because a much more illustrious set of robbers is showcased later in the film.
Then we’re treated to stock footage of an old documentary explaining the fall of Rome, being interspersed with video clips of what Moore perceives as modern-day America’s own decline: reality-tv shows, YouTube, and his arch-nemesis, George W. Bush.
With this set of comedy aside, Moore then plunges deep into the heart of his movie, moving swiftly between separate narratives describing the calamitous situations created by our free-market economic system. We’re shown the eviction of a family from their home from the inside-out, a man from a company called “Condo Vultures” who brags about how quickly he can turn a buck on others’ misfortune, and the practice of “Dead Peasants” insurance, where companies take out life insurance policies on their employees and then reap the rewards when they die.
As “Capitalism” cycles through different stories of economic ruin and unfairness, it also instructs the audience about the history of how things came to be this way. Moore juxtaposes a stern Jimmy Carter warning about the perils of greed and waste with the rise of Ronald Reagan, whose Merril Lynch-driven cabinet slashed both taxes on the super-wealthy and a whole slew of consumer protection regulations. We’re also shown how corporate America bankrolled the deregulation spree, with its army of lobbyists and stealth advisors inserted throughout successive governments.
All of this culminates into the last third of the film, which starts at our most recent economic crisis. For the answers on the roots of the disaster, the never-subtle Moore turns to 80’s-era regulator and iconoclast William Black, asking him, “What the fuck happened?”
The last arc of “Capitalism” explores that question with the kind of investigative zeal that is rarely seen in American journalism today. A slew of both economic experts and whistleblower members of Congress are called in to explain that, after decades of high-powered corporate lobbying of both major political parties, our economic system basically collapsed due to the weight of its own hubris.
And the most damning part of all this — the fact that history’s most insistent capitalists ran to the government for a bailout — is explained, in the words of interviewee Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), as an “intelligence operation” ran by banking institutions like Goldman Sachs, which successfully lobbied for the enormous, no-strings-attached bailout package last fall.
Yet Moore isn’t cynical enough to make the movie into nothing more than a sermon about what’s wrong with our country. He uses his talents as a filmmaker to highlight much of what’s right. Towards the end of the film, he takes us through tales of families fighting to keep their neighbors from being evicted, workers staging a sit-in when a bailed-out bank refused to provide a loan to let their company keep them on, and the historic election of Barack Obama.
Speaking of Obama, “Capitalism” is largely agnostic about the President himself. Moore highlights Obama’s ambitious words and populist demeanor, yet he also notes that some of the very figures most responsible for the economic disaster have ended up in influential places in his administration. He also notes that the financial institutions at the heart of of the disaster have contributed generously to Obama and other Democrats. But all of this isn’t used to write Obama off. On the contrary, Moore highlights these facts to point out that it’s up to all of us — the people of the country who were so energized and invigorated during the election season — to come together to hold the political establishment’s feet to the fire to do something about all the issues highlighted in the film.
That’s the ultimate message of “Capitalism: A Love Story.” Moore ends the film with one final prank on Wall Street, and he sermonizes about how none of the ills highlighted in the movie are going to be ameliorated all by themselves. Rather, it’s up to the people of the country to help realize the dream of the late President Roosevelt — who Moore highlights prominently with a rarely-seen historical news reel — that everyone in the country would be able to have a good job, decent housing, food on the table, and health care coverage.
In that sense, this really is, as has been said about it, the “culmination” of Moore’s work as a documentarian. His film asks us to love our neighbors as ourselves, and to work together to eliminate our common ills, a theme that he has highlighted in every movie he’s made since “Roger & Me.” Whether the people who watch this movie will mobilize to answer Moore’s call to work towards a more just, humane, and fair economic system remains to be seen, but what can be said is that he has crafted one hell of a case for doing so.
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
I saw it a few weeks ago myself and came with similar reaction to your first viewing. Not sure I can convince myself for Rd 2
Seeing with an audience that can really get into the movie really does help.
In response to another comment. See in context »Yea, being able to run with your crowd sure makes things that much more interesting.
Hey look… there’s a cliff. Let’s go for it!
In response to another comment. See in context »Michael Moore is a non American in my book, He say’s that capitalism is bad, but receives millions on his movies?? If he belives that capitalism is so bad, give me all of his money he’s made on the capitalism that he hates so much. He should move to HugoChavasland if he hates this country sooo much. Mindbender
I’m not really sure I have ever bought the argument that if you’re someone who has done well, that that means you can’t reach out and try to help others. If anything, those who do well have a greater responsibility to do that.
As for him being “non-American” — do you want to see his birth certificate? :p
In response to another comment. See in context »Well as far as doing well, does that not mean that capitalism is working? Micheal wants our country to be a socialist one. One where as we all make the same amount of money and share the wealth. So where does one get any wherewithall to work harder and be more affluent if all you money goes to someone else.Or why would you want to do well in school if lets use an example. Say you have gotten all A’s accross the board in class and the teacher says johnny you did great all AAA’s but we are going to give you an C because we have to share the scores. Same thing as sharing the wealth.
In response to another comment. See in context »As far as i’m concerned if I make lot’s of money because I worked harder than the next guy then so be it. As for sharing my wealth yes I would. But it would be my choice not the governments.You see if the government takes my wealth and gives it to you ,then thats socialism.Justs like it is now. Big government owns all of America. Does it not? We were sold down the road without a voice being heard from the people.Remenber WE THE PEOPLE.
And if the people who make the least in the world work the hardest?
In response to another comment. See in context »I think by using the word “hardest” it muddies the water surrounding the issue. I used to work much “harder” at my job when I was performing manual labor in the field, but now I provide a different service indoors that my employer values more and has a bigger effect on profits. However, both positions pay fairly well and are essential to the operation of the company. In what way is a person to determine the value of a certain task? Is it always worth the same? Does it increase or decrease in value over time? What if it is proved to be an inefficient process? It is questions such as these that begin to illustrate the difficulty in determining wages and prices, while questioning who works “hardest” strikes me as more of an emotional argument.
In response to another comment. See in context »Yes, but I was referring specifically to the other comment’s point that they think they “work harder” so they deserve more. I’m sure the billion people in the world living on less than two dollars a day generally work the hardest, yet certainly don’t reap the rewards, if that’s supposed to be the scale.
In response to another comment. See in context »I’d not bring his rot into my house if someone paid me to watch it. His movie damns that which helped make America great and was made by someone that hates the founding principles of our country.
Did the last 35 years of center-right economic policy make us great, or was it the fact that we’ve persevered in the face of so much? Remember who we are, America.
In response to another comment. See in context »I really appreciate your write up. I know there is a lot of criticism of Mr. Moore, and do not personally like his style, but that takes nothing away from your writing.
Nice review.
Presented well.
It was an impressive read.
Thank you for that, as I will probably not see it and wanted to get a better understanding from someone who has put some thought into the film they just saw.
Thanks again. *Sincere*
Well done.
Thanks a lot!
(also sincere)
In response to another comment. See in context »Bravo, Zaid! Perhaps it takes two viewings in order to produce the last word on ‘Capitalism’…as far as I can see you have done it here.
If for whatever damned reason someone will not go to see ‘Capitalism’, the very next best thing is to read your review of ‘Capitalism’. For everyone who has seen ‘Capitalism’, it is now mandatory to read your exposition of ‘Capitalism’.