Inside: We saw MICHAEL CLAYTON

We don't go out to the movies all that often anymore (and if we could download new releases I think we'd stop altogether), but when we do, we pop over to Rotten Tomatoes to see what the critics have to say about the flick before we commit $20 and a couple of hours to it.

Michael Clayton, which we saw last night, has a 90% Tomatoer rating, or 150 positive reviews out of 166. And the critics didn't just like it; they used words like "engrossing," "intelligent," "complex," "brilliant" and "exciting" -- how could we resist?

After seeing it, I'm a little less enthused than the critics. I don't disagree with them completely -- it is, at its core, a very good film, full of superb acting and a straightforward plot that doesn't rely on ridiculous twists, predictable love stories or showy pyrotechnics to carry it (MC's use of a single explosion makes it all that more effective).

But although the film is smart, I wouldn't call it complex. True, the audience has no idea what's going on in the first part of the film, but all becomes clear easily in the second half, without any necessary piecing together by the viewer. I watched the first part of the movie intensely, looking for small but relevant clues, and I found out later that Anthony had done the same. I went in expecting a plot with intricate layers and blink-and-you'll miss-it details. But this is not that type of movie.

And it's actually fine that it isn't. The story, though slow, is interesting. And, again, the acting is excellent. Clooney is almost repulsive here and, although his shaggy appearance may have dimmed down his wattage a bit, most of it is solely thanks to his acting chops; he conveys a tired, sour and resentful man under duress without saying a word. But my favorite scenes belonged to the consistently excellent Tilda Swinton as corporate lawyer Karen Crowder. Her practice speeches in front of a mirror and her nervous attempt to orchestrate a hit are both uncomfortable to watch and dryly enjoyable. Never has being corrupt looked so stressful.

My bottom line on Michael Clayton is that I probably would have enjoyed it more if I had skipped the reviews and watched it without expectations. I also recommend getting it on DVD rather than seeing it in the theater -- it does have some slow stretches that would have seemed a lot faster had I been able to take a bathroom break and stretch out on the couch.

Before the movie, we saw a preview for Vantage Point (due out in February) which, in pretty direct contrast, looks to be chock full of explosions and plot twists. It'll also probably be chock full of Hollywood cliches, but it does look like fun -- basically, this is what I hope the new season of 24 looks like.

Out: This morning at the Lake

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.)

Inside: Destined to receive GFY Fug the Cover status

Okay, I know I haven't posted in a while, for which I am sorry. But not as sorry as I am that this has happened to Matt Damon:


On the plus side, he's THE SEXIEST MAN ALIVE (until next year)! On the downside, seriously, could People have chosen a less sexy photo? He's pale, he looks hungover, and his right eye reminds me a wee bit of Aughra from the Dark Crystal. Although I've been fond of Mr. Damon ever since he took off his shirt in the process of rescuing Claire Danes from an abusive boyfriend in a movie based on a John Grisham book many a year ago, this photo looks less Bourne Identity and more Team America to me.

Out: Eagle Falls

We went on a quick hike to Eagle Falls yesterday. (Photo credit: Anthony. Treat-dangling, sit-still incentive for Otis credit: me).

Inside: This is the extent of our Halloween costume purchases this year