Michael Moore Talks "Sicko," Heath Care, Edutainment, Cuba
There isn't much middle ground on Michael Moore; his bromide-laden documentaries have earned him both an enthusiastic following from many on the left and unvarnished vitriol from much of the right. But as divisive as Moore's films can be, they've also been remarkable successful with audiences and critics.
"Fahrenheit 9/11" is the highest-grossing doc of all time, and "Bowling for Columbine" won Moore an Oscar for best documentary. With "Sicko" (which opened Friday in New York, and made a remarkable $70,000 on one screen), Moore turns his sights on the American health care system; specifically, he posits that universal health care in Canada, France, and the U.K. offers both a greater level of service, general satisfaction, and fewer serious, potentially grievous problems than does America's privatized model.

"Sicko" generated its share of controversy because of its last segment, during which Moore took a group of afflicted 9/11 workers to Cuba for health care; some have accused Moore of whitewashing Fidel Castro's human rights violations, and the U.S. Treasury department has investigated the trip to determine if it violated the U.S. embargo with Cuba. But Moore defended his stop in Havana, saying the U.S. should be doing more to help the ailing, especially those it considers its heroes.
Moore spoke with journalists at a press conference at the Cannes Film Festival shortly after the film's premiere; he discussed balancing facts with entertainment and reforming the American system -- and Americans' thinking when it comes to universal health care.
Q: You oversimplify some things, sometimes for entertainment purposes. That does make you open to more mainstream critics who see you as telling incomplete truths. You know that will happen so why do you choose to make your films this way?
Michael Moore: I'm making a movie. I have a 90 to 120 minute time-frame. What you call oversimplification I call a rocking good way to tell a story that leaves no one bored and wanting more at the end of the movie. That's my goal

Q: Do you have any immediate and realistic solutions for the United States problems that could be implemented immediately?
Moore: One thing we really need to do is get the money out of politics and reform so that these pharmaceutical companies and health insurance companies can't buy our congress. If we took the money out we'd have a better chance of getting the bills passed and begin a pre-universal, not-for-profit healthcare. I have a list of sites on my web site. I have a list of organizations I encourage people to hook up with and bills for congress. I hope people will become active participants and do something about this. Sometimes I feel I'm in a position and I should try to initiate some engagement. I don't really think that's my role to do that and something gets lost in this whole discussion about the film and the festival. I'm a filmmaker and I seldom get to talk about being a filmmaker, making films or what I think about films. Instead I'm asked political questions and I'm only equipped to answer the questions so far. I try to put into my films some thing I feel but I wasn't kidding when I said I wasn't writing a book. I'm very careful about the facts in my film -- I'm careful they're accurate and correct. If I say, "There's nearly 50 million people without health care," that's a fact. You have to trust that's a fact. But if I say, "I think part of health insurance should be eliminated," that's a conclusion I've reached through the facts I've found. If I said things that were wrong, trust me, people could come at me from all direction but they don't because things I state as truth are true and things I state as opinions are mine. So the only way these critics can come at me is for the opinions I express or by confusing the opinions for facts.
Click here for the full interview!
"Fahrenheit 9/11" is the highest-grossing doc of all time, and "Bowling for Columbine" won Moore an Oscar for best documentary. With "Sicko" (which opened Friday in New York, and made a remarkable $70,000 on one screen), Moore turns his sights on the American health care system; specifically, he posits that universal health care in Canada, France, and the U.K. offers both a greater level of service, general satisfaction, and fewer serious, potentially grievous problems than does America's privatized model.

"Sicko" generated its share of controversy because of its last segment, during which Moore took a group of afflicted 9/11 workers to Cuba for health care; some have accused Moore of whitewashing Fidel Castro's human rights violations, and the U.S. Treasury department has investigated the trip to determine if it violated the U.S. embargo with Cuba. But Moore defended his stop in Havana, saying the U.S. should be doing more to help the ailing, especially those it considers its heroes.
Moore spoke with journalists at a press conference at the Cannes Film Festival shortly after the film's premiere; he discussed balancing facts with entertainment and reforming the American system -- and Americans' thinking when it comes to universal health care.
Q: You oversimplify some things, sometimes for entertainment purposes. That does make you open to more mainstream critics who see you as telling incomplete truths. You know that will happen so why do you choose to make your films this way?
Michael Moore: I'm making a movie. I have a 90 to 120 minute time-frame. What you call oversimplification I call a rocking good way to tell a story that leaves no one bored and wanting more at the end of the movie. That's my goal

Q: Do you have any immediate and realistic solutions for the United States problems that could be implemented immediately?
Moore: One thing we really need to do is get the money out of politics and reform so that these pharmaceutical companies and health insurance companies can't buy our congress. If we took the money out we'd have a better chance of getting the bills passed and begin a pre-universal, not-for-profit healthcare. I have a list of sites on my web site. I have a list of organizations I encourage people to hook up with and bills for congress. I hope people will become active participants and do something about this. Sometimes I feel I'm in a position and I should try to initiate some engagement. I don't really think that's my role to do that and something gets lost in this whole discussion about the film and the festival. I'm a filmmaker and I seldom get to talk about being a filmmaker, making films or what I think about films. Instead I'm asked political questions and I'm only equipped to answer the questions so far. I try to put into my films some thing I feel but I wasn't kidding when I said I wasn't writing a book. I'm very careful about the facts in my film -- I'm careful they're accurate and correct. If I say, "There's nearly 50 million people without health care," that's a fact. You have to trust that's a fact. But if I say, "I think part of health insurance should be eliminated," that's a conclusion I've reached through the facts I've found. If I said things that were wrong, trust me, people could come at me from all direction but they don't because things I state as truth are true and things I state as opinions are mine. So the only way these critics can come at me is for the opinions I express or by confusing the opinions for facts.
Click here for the full interview!
Related Items
| Movie: | Bowling for Columbine |
| Sicko | |
| Cannes Film Festival 2007 | |
| Celeb: | Michael Moore |
|
on Jun 25 2007 08:29 PM Shocker! the critics love mikey moore. (Reply to this) |
|
on Jun 25 2007 08:53 PM I have seen the first 45 minutes of this film from a website that somehow posted it. I live in Canada, I gotta say, this is a film that only Americans will get a kick out of. I don't care to hear about my own health care system that I know all about. It's being hailed as "SO FUNNY YOU MIGHT POP A STITCH" no, it's not funny. it isn't funny at all, really. At least, not in the first 45 minutes. I mean, if americans really don't know what our healthcare system is like, then sure. tune in. but it's basically just a long explanation of it. (again, first 45 minutes) (Reply to this) |
![]() on Jun 25 2007 09:59 PM In reply to this comment (#871049) I have a vague idea of what it's like, good and bad, and my Canadian friends says it's enough for me to know what goes on up there. So, I won't go see America's favorite liberal trying to make me "laugh 'cause it's true" spiel. I already did, it was "Knocked Up". (Reply to this) |
|
on Jun 26 2007 12:21 AM Moores films are so one-sided, never showing anything that might disagree with his work, its just simply boring. Would be far more interesting if he had give and take, someone on the opposite side too. (Reply to this) |
|
on Jun 26 2007 01:01 AM What's ironic is that one of the biggest criticisms of Moore is that his documentaries are so one sided, but his style, which includes being so one-sided, is entertaining enough that far more people see his documentaries than any other. A more balanced documentary would simply not get the audience. Moore wants people to see his documentaries, and he knows how to get people to see them. (Reply to this) |
|
on Jun 26 2007 01:33 AM [b]Research[/b] I heard Michael Moore did extra research this for this flim. This time he used both Google searches AND wikipedia. It opens friday let's bust out the second grade intelligence and walk like lemmings into it (Reply to this) |
![]() on Jun 26 2007 06:36 AM The only time I laughed at anything Michael Moore did was when he blew up Team America's headquarters. (Reply to this) |
|
on Jun 26 2007 11:02 AM Well, I find his documentaries highly entertaining and enlightening. Do I believe everything in them? Of course not. But do they intrigue me enough to want to learn more? Certainly. And in most cases (especially with Fahrenheit 9/11) even if only 20% of it is true, it's still enough that action should be taken to corrct the issues. (Reply to this) |
|
on Jun 26 2007 11:37 AM Everyone LOVES to blast Michael Moore for something. He aims his films at the general public, so they are blasted for being stupid (well, so is the general public). He tries to make them entertaining, so they are blasted for not being like other documentaries which the general public won't see. He's also blasted for not being truthful in his documentaries, and although he doesn't include both sides, I have never read anything that supports the theory that facts in his films are actually false. There's a very big difference between leaving certain facts out and lying. Whatever Michael Moore is claimed to be, he seems to generally want to help people and make a difference and he does believe in what he is doing. It's hard to criticize him for that. (Reply to this) |
|
on Jun 26 2007 11:55 AM In reply to this comment (#871056) Fair enough, but my mama taught me a half truth is just a lie in diguise. I agree that we shouldn't right him off as the worst thing since Hitler, but we also shouldn't venerate him either. Just accept him as what he is, a guy who's figured out how to make a buck and is playing it to the hilt. (Reply to this) |
|
on Jun 26 2007 12:08 PM Sure, maybe he's a bit one-sided, but there's no denying that Health Care in the US pales in comparison to the rest of the industrialized west. I had the good fortune to catch a sneak preview of the film in Chicago last weekend and I was blown away. Maybe it didn't tell me anything I didn't already know, but it was still a well crafted piece of editorial journalism. The fact is, our health care system is broken. My parents had fallen victim to it. My friends have too. It's not a revolutionary idea, but it is still very important. (Reply to this) |
![]() on Jun 26 2007 12:27 PM Cynicism often gets mistaken for intelligence on these boards. At least he's trying to do something of consequence and if you've seen the movie it's very clear that Moore's greatest flaws are his idealism and belief that american's are actually caring, decent people who aren't slaves to the almighty dollar. (Reply to this) |
|
on Jun 26 2007 01:53 PM Moore is an idiot (Reply to this) |
|
on Jun 26 2007 02:24 PM In reply to this comment (#871061) The ironic post of the day, ladies and gentlemen. (Reply to this) |
|
on Jun 26 2007 02:25 PM I love what Michael Moore does, because it really angers the right side of the media and politics especially. When the right wing media gets a hold of Moore's viewpoints or documentaries, they tear it apart, when in truth, the right wing media does much more to bend the facts or flat out lie to get their point across. Case in point: Two weeks ago, Bill O'Reilly had a segment on his show in which he blast the New York Times for not putting an article on a terrorist plot on its front page; he showed an image of the paper, folded in half showing the top half of the front page. Surprisingly, the bottom half of the newspaper included an entire article on the plot he claimed the paper didn't run. For those who claim Moore twists the facts to fit his own agenda.... well that modern media, fellas. Everyone seems to do it, whether they are left, right, or center. I happen to agree with Moore's views, so I can see what is truth and fiction more easily than others. He is a smart man who, despite what many believe, wants whats best of the average American. The rest of the media is at fault for turning him into something more... (Reply to this) |
|
on Jun 26 2007 07:15 PM micheal moore may be weirdly overweight, and kind of ugly looking (this coming from a straight guy), but his docs always seem to be very critical on topics that do not get enough attention and his docs end up great topic starters. (Reply to this) |
|
on Jun 26 2007 08:34 PM I like how he tells us what to think. (Reply to this) |
![]() on Jun 26 2007 08:40 PM [b]Here's a fix[/b] Get rid of ambulance chasers like Edwards, institute immigration reform (so we're not subsidizing everybody and their mother and brothers), and then, perhaps, you can socialize healtcare in a melting pot society like the USA. For now, Mr. Moore (sniffing irony) should get on a treadmill and worry about his cholesterol (another reason that American healthcare costs so much -- b/c people expect that the healthcare system will save them after years of treating their bodies like shit). Mr. Moore is not a trend-setter, topic starter -- he's a rabble rouser. A true visionary persuades people to a cause -- he doesn't incite those who already support said cause. (Reply to this) |
![]() on Jun 27 2007 12:37 AM In reply to this comment (#871065) Yeah MM shouldn't tell us what to think, that's the government's job. (Reply to this) |
|
on Jun 27 2007 01:07 AM In reply to this comment (#871066) You sound smart, but you are not. Why should getting "rid of" Edwards precede social healthcare? What does the fact that we're supposedly a "melting pot society" have to do with socialized healthcare? This is just nonsense. You would have to be an American to be part of American socialized health care. That is why Americans now cannot simply go to Canada and demand Canadian health care. Illegal immigrants would at most get immediate life threatening treatment (as is expected to give anyone today, anyway, no matter their means), but none of the more usual long-term or non immediate life threatening treatments most people have to pay for through their medical insurance today, anyway. The government would pay for Americans for the treatment, instead of the medical insurance companies. Poor, obvious and expected ad hominem/fallacious attack on Moore. Healthcare cost are increased by unhealthy lifestyles, sure, but that doesn't cover all reasons for its expensiveness. Here's another reason: Why do drugs in Canada and Mexico cost so much less? Because there are various trade policies and regulations supported by pharmaceutical companies through the FDA to keep the price artificially up. For profit, of course. That is why a $200 medicine in the US will probably be about $2 in other countries. I do not find Moore's one-sidedness to be wrong (or boring). He is not trying to make a debate, but simply point out one side. He never pretends to show both sides of the argument, unlike a certain 24-hour news channel that rhimes with "Ox News." Someone else can, and will, make a debate of it. I think that the pro-universal healthcare side is a side Americans hardly get to hear anything about. That is why it might be painfully dull for a Canadian to watch, but not for an American like myself. (Reply to this) |
Related Links
Related Articles
- Fahrenheit 9/11 Sequel News 45
- Michael Moore Scratched Off Wolf Blitzer's Christmas Card List 20
- Box Office Guru Preview: Rats and Bruce Hit Theaters This Weekend 5
- Michael Moore Talks "Sicko," Heath Care, Edutainment, Cuba 26
- Cannes Wrap-Up: Michael Moore's Latest And Leo's Global Warming Doc 8
- Weinsteins & Lionsgate Snag Michael Moore's "Sicko" 12
- Box Office Guru Preview: Santa Battles Borat for Weekend Crown 10
- "Apocalypto" Apocalypse? 15
- Box Office Wrapup: "Miami Vice" Knocks Pirates From #1 Spot 14
- Box Office Wrapup: Women Power "Break-Up" to #1 11
Most Discussed
- Uwe Boll's Five Favorite Films 83
- Fahrenheit 9/11 Sequel News 45
- Box Office Guru Wrapup: Iron Man Rocks, Speed Racer Stalls 44
- George Lucas - A Super-Producer's History 39
- Peter Segal Talks About His Five Fave Films 36
- Ask Rotten Tomatoes a Question! 34
- Indiana Jonesin': The Best of Harrison Ford 31
- Nicolas Cage to Play Bad Lieutenant 22
- David Lynch and Werner Herzog Plan Horror Film 19
- Total Recall: Our Favorite Talking Animals 18
Latest News
- Weekly Ketchup: A-Team casting rumors, Scorsese meets Sinatra 1
- RT Review Revue: Prince Caspian and Viewer Mail! 18
- Trailer Bulletin: The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor 5
- Cannes 2008: Jeff Vespa Premieres Nosebleed with David Arquette 0
- Cannes 2008 Exclusive: Michel Gondry Joins Babelgum Jury 1
- Critics Consensus: Prince Caspian is Movie Royalty 16
- Nicolas Cage to Play Bad Lieutenant 22
- Point Breaking News: A Sequel in the Works 18
- Fahrenheit 9/11 Sequel News 45
- RT Interview: Kat Dennings on Charlie Bartlett, Nick and Norah and Death 3
Latest Interviews
- RT Interview: Kat Dennings on Charlie Bartlett, Nick and Norah and Death 3
- RT Interview: Morgan Spurlock on the Personal, the Political and Osama bin Laden 2
- RT Interview: Jon Favreau on Iron Man, Effective CGI and the New Marvel Movies 14
- RT interview: Roger Deakins on No Country for Old Men 16
- RT Interview: Charlie Wilson 8
- RT Interview: Colm Meaney on Three and Out, Life on Mars and life after Trek 2
- Jackie Chan Picks His Five Favorite Movies -- And Only One of Them Stars Jackie Chan 16
- RT Interview: Director Baillie Walsh on Ziggy, Roxy and Daniel Craig in Flashbacks of a Fool 1
- RT Interview: Milo Ventimiglia Gets Dark in Pathology, Talks Role In Neveldine & Taylor's Game 7
- RT Interview: Daniel Craig on Bond, Growing Up and Fading Out in Hollywood 6
Latest Features
- George Lucas - A Super-Producer's History 39
- Uwe Boll's Five Favorite Films 83
- Indiana Jonesin': The Best of Harrison Ford 31
- Peter Segal Talks About His Five Fave Films 36
- New Line Cinema: A Retrospective 36
- Neil Marshall's 10 Post-Apocalyptic Picks 18
- Ole! Tour Mexico Through the Movies! 21
- The Ghost Stays in the Picture 6
- Exclusive: RT Visits the Set of An Education 0
- Exclusive: Anna Popplewell and William Moseley talk Prince Caspian 6






