Inside: We saw SICKO

For the most part, I’m onboard with Michael Moore. After all, I’m a tree-hugging, bleeding-hearted liberal. And Moore’s shtick—average American guy gets fed up with the powers-that-be and decides to get up and do something about it—is exactly the kind of thing that manages to penetrate my hardened cynical surface and warm my squishy idealistic core. Plus, I love anything that gets conservatives all riled up.

Unfortunately, a lot of the controversy around Moore, especially since the release of Bowling for Columbine in 2002 and Fahrenheit 911in 2004, has had less to do with the issues and more to do with fact manipulation. Which pains me, because even doing some relatively minor truth twisting, like the “South Park”-esque cartoon in Bowling (more on that here) is enough to bring down the whole house of cards. It may make for a more exciting film, but it also gives critics plenty of fodder to work with (and to manipulate according to their own agenda).

In response to his detractors, Moore backed up all of the facts in Fahrenheit on his site, which is nice (especially for people who have a lot of time on their hands). But even if every fact in Fahrenheit is solid, it still has that propaganda-like feel. And this coming from someone who is a solid member of the choir Moore’s preaching to.

Moore may have taken some similar criticisms to heart while making Sicko, his expose of the healthcare industry. Sicko is both straightforward and focused and, instead of aligning the facts to fit its thesis, instead relies heavily on interviews. And the interviews—with victims of the U.S. healthcare industry, regretful purveyors of the industry’s cruel policies, and beneficiaries of socialized medicine in Canada, the U.K., France and even Cuba—are effective. It’s hard to defend our healthcare industry after listening to a woman whose young daughter died because the closest hospital wasted critical time insisting that she be taken to an in-network hospital rather than treating her.

Sicko isn’t squeaky clean, but its faults appear to be mostly sins of omission; primarily, critics agree that Moore paints too rosy a picture of socialized healthcare systems in other countries. It’s a pity that Moore glosses over the downsides of socialized medicine because, frankly, France’s healthcare system doesn’t have to be perfect for it to be exponentially better than the private, profit-driven insurance industry in the U.S. that, inherently, must put money ahead of patient health. Even with some checks in its minus column, socialized medicine is still the clear winner here.

For me, the film’s biggest weakness is its lack of a detailed call to action. There is some discussion about how Americans don’t vote and, although it is a valid point, it just isn’t enough. Sicko is effectively alarming, especially for people like the underinsured self-employed author of this post, but it leaves the viewer somewhat clueless about what to do next. (Note: there are some suggested actions on Moore’s site.)