Today’s Prayer Focus
MOVIE REVIEW
Sicko
also known as “SiCKO”
MPA Rating:
for brief strong language.
for brief strong language.
Reviewed by: Chris Sosa
CONTRIBUTOR
| Moral Rating: | Better than Average |
| Moviemaking Quality: |
|
| Primary Audience: | Adults |
| Genre: | Documentary, Politics |
| Length: | 1 hr. 53 min. |
| Year of Release: | 2007 |
| USA Release: |
June 29, 2007 (limited) |
Relevant Issues
| Featuring | Michael Moore |
| Director |
Michael Moore |
| Producer | Harvey Weinstein, Bob Weinstein, Michael Moore |
| Distributor |
 Lionsgate (Lions Gate Entertainment Corp.) |
“This might hurt a little.”
For any healthy person, America’s medical care providers probably seem more than adequate. However, for those dealing with serious medical conditions, receiving treatment can quickly become an insurance nightmare. Michael Moore is here to tell those stories in his latest film “Sicko.”
As far as content is concerned, this film is nearly devoid of anything offensive. Violence is minimal, mainly consisting of surgical procedures. Language is limited, with a few rude words and one or two harsh words. Sexual content consists of one comment made by George Bush, attempting to applaud OB/GYN’s for their services, in which he makes a remark that can easily be taken in more than one way. Nudity is limited to one extremely brief scene of partial nudity in which someone is about to receive a shot in their backside.
Artistically speaking, the film is nearly flawless. The documentary style is put to good use as Moore conducts interviews, explores other cultures, and performs his signature stunts. Documentaries are nearly never this engaging, as this style is used to create a film that feels more akin to an engrossing drama. The two hours passed by at a lightning pace for me, as I watched individuals from multiple cultures deal with health care and insurance. Much time is also spent educating viewers on the beginnings of American health care, those responsible for its current state, and those who have attempted to improve it.
“Sicko” is also entertaining. For those familiar with Moore’s previous films, this one may come as a surprise. It is a more good-natured and humorous film than his others, and is more focused on the actual subject matter. The mood is kept light by humorous content. While it would not seem that a film dealing with health care could really be that funny, I heard more laughter in my theater than I’ve heard during some regular comedies.
Aside from its humor, this movie is disturbing and shocking, but not in a graphic way. Watching a mother discuss the death of her 18-month child because of refused treatment, or hearing the story of how a woman’s husband died, simply because his claim was denied on the grounds of his treatment being “experimental,” was truly unsettling. Watching 9/11 rescue workers be denied treatment because of their non-government status was also incredibly disturbing.
However, shocking and disturbing the film can be, in the end it is inspirational. While relying on our heath care system in America is shown to be at times deadly, much of the film is devoted to showing truly caring and selfless individuals give help to those in need. Rather than simply complaining about American health care, Michael Moore goes on an international tour showing systems that work, and it’s amazing to see how far some countries have come in this area. The moral of the story presents an incredibly Christian worldview, that all people should be willing to help those in need, without motive or self-gain. This is a moral viewpoint more people need to accept in our increasingly selfish culture.
Provided all viewers are pre-teen and up, this movie provides a platform for families to discuss important issues, and have a good time doing it. “Sicko” is a celebration of true virtue, and preaches a message of giving to which one could hardly object. Everyone should see this remarkable film.
Violence: Mild / Profanity: Moderate / Sex/Nudity: Mild
Editor’s note: As usual, please be aware that the reviewer of this film is not a staff member of Christian Answers and none of the staff of Christian Answers has viewed this film. Comments made in the review are those of the reviewer alone, and do not reflect the opinions of Films for Christ or the Christian Answers Network. In this case, the reviewer of this film is simply the only person who volunteered to write a review of this movie at the time of its opening. We appreciate his kind help and generous attitude in providing a summary/overview of this film as a springboard for further discussion. As always, Christian Spotlight publishes comments from other viewers to provide a more complete picture of the pros and cons of the movie. We believe that no one person’s opinion should be relied upon for recommending or disrecommending most movies. That is why we go to the extra effort and expense of publishing viewer comments from other Christians.
Positive
Response to Anthony’s comment: I have not seen the film by Mr. Moore. I am very disappointed with many of the reviews of this movie. My disappointment has nothing to do with my political views at all. The only truly angry reviews I have read have come from people attacking the woman named Carrie for expressing her view. They have accused her of right-wing bias and vitriol, but I didn’t detect any of that.
No, I don’t agree that every word is a lie, HOWEVER many of his “facts” are inaccurate. Yes, the US doesn’t have universal healthcare, but no country has “free” healthcare. The costs are paid in up to 40% income taxes like in Sweden and Britian and other countries with socialized healthcare. The US does have the best healthcare system in the western world because we don’t have socialized healthcare. No one can be denied treatment if they go to the ER, by law people have to be treated there regardless of if they can pay. I have heard from people with relatives in Britain and Canada that 'you will die in the waiting room before you will be seen by a doctor' because the healthcare system is so bad. In Canada a woman who lives there was told she’d have to wait two years for an appointment for a doctor to see her about her detatched retina. It took less than two weeks for her to have surgery here in the US.
The Cuban healthcare system which Mr. Moore adresses only works if you are a very important person. Most people who are poor recieve poor unsanitary treatment if they recieve it at all. Fidel Castro even brought in foreign doctors when he needed surgery. He didn’t trust the doctors in his own country, that speaks volumes. Of course, someone coming to do a documentary is going to be shown “the best” or what people there want you to see.
I do not think this site should be the forum for political viewpoint debates, it is not a forum for such. I am only writing my post to get some facts out in response to other’s posts, so there is no need to post about me being hypocritical by posting this message here. Most importantly, I think that people should think about being Christlike when posting here, which means not being accusitory or hateful just because you do not agree with someone else’s post. Thank you.
Laura N., age 20
Positive—Fantastic film by Michael Moore. Who cares if he’s a left-winger? He’s 100% right when it comes to the issues raised in SiCKO. Moore is something of a modern day Mark Twain. By using humor, satire, wit, and painstaking research, he brings serious issues into the national discourse and makes people want to pay attention and discuss, rather than just worry about their own problems and fear the government.
Watching Moore expose Bush and DeLay and Hillary Clinton and these other political weasels who grin while taking huge amount of money from health care companies and big pharm companies reminded me of Jesus knocking over the moneychangers outside the temple. Moore truly is an extraordinary provacateur and his film is loaded with Christian messages. Any active Christian should go out and see it.
On a personal note, I have been a fan of Moore’s since “Roger and Me.” One, because the film was a terrific high wire act, and two, because Moore was hanging out in the theater lobby after the film got out to talk with viewers. This was back in 1989, before he was a huge star, but I found him to be very approachable and funny and it was a real treat to get to have a spontaneaous dialogue with a filmmaker right after seeing their work.
Excellent! / 5
Watching Moore expose Bush and DeLay and Hillary Clinton and these other political weasels who grin while taking huge amount of money from health care companies and big pharm companies reminded me of Jesus knocking over the moneychangers outside the temple. Moore truly is an extraordinary provacateur and his film is loaded with Christian messages. Any active Christian should go out and see it.
On a personal note, I have been a fan of Moore’s since “Roger and Me.” One, because the film was a terrific high wire act, and two, because Moore was hanging out in the theater lobby after the film got out to talk with viewers. This was back in 1989, before he was a huge star, but I found him to be very approachable and funny and it was a real treat to get to have a spontaneaous dialogue with a filmmaker right after seeing their work.
Excellent! / 5
Frank Rumble, age 38
Positive—It’s hard for me to feel passionate about this film: I live in Canada and our healthcare system is heaven compared to the American system. Still, one must give credit to Michael Moore as an engaging filmmaker and storyteller—he achieves a fine balance between personal storytelling and historical/political context. That being said, I have lived in both Britain and Canada, and must therefore correct Moore on one major issue: wait times in both countries are often terrible. I don’t simply speak from personal experience, but also based on statistical data. One can find oneself waiting in the ER for hours—not the easy 0-45 minutes presented in the film. Michael Moore is a talented filmmaker, but he should be fair to his audiences and present a balanced argument. While I agree with most of his views, his ends don’t necessarily justify his means. Nevertheless, I thoroughly enjoyed this documentary, and urge Christians with sound critical thinking skills to see it.
Good / 4
Good / 4
Cornelius Christian, age 19
Positive—For the first time in 10 years I’m proud to be a Christian after reading the review here for “Sicko” and the responses of other Christians to this movie. Thank you all of you.
Excellent! / 5
Excellent! / 5
Anton Bursch, age 33
Positive—Just wanted to throw in my two cents as a lifelong Canadian citizen, just having seen this movie. Canada’s health care does lag in certain respects: for example, if you require a non-essential surgery (ie. hip replacement, knee surgery etc.), it can take a very long time for a surgery date to come your way, wheras in the United States, if you are very well insured, or able to pay tens of thousands in cash, you’ll likely have it much more quickly, albeit with higher premiums and copays.
Other than that, and perhaps slightly longer hospital wait times, I’d say Canada’s system is leaps and bounds better on the whole. Bottom line, /everybody/ gets the care they need, including high quality and comprehensive emergency care. No premiums, no bill, no mucking around with money in any way. A note to all the “reviewers” who’ve not even bothered to see the film, its primary theme is that while universal health care is a tax burden, it takes care of the poor and helpless in times of need in a way private health care simply does not. Universal health care removes profit from the equation, and thus prevents the well-off from buying their way to good health care, while the less-well-off are left behind to struggle with the overwhelming debts that inevitably come from even small procedures.
As a Canadian, I can say from first-hand experience that I’ve had nothing but fantastic health care—I go to the doctor on occasion, and I’ve even had to go to the emergency room a couple of times (once for a nasty flu bug, and another for a broken leg). I bring my care card (a health ID card), fill out a history, and they give full treatment. Since I’m a young student with a low income, I do not pay income taxes yet. Most of the tax burden is supported by those with good and wealthy incomes, in order that everybody is taken care of in this nation without exception. The story that Canada’s system is broken, bad, worse than America’s, too expensive, etc. is solely perpetuated in the United States for reasons I don’t fully understand. Suffice to say, it is a false story. Take a look at WHO reports on patient care, wait times, success rates, infant mortality, etc. and you’ll find the Unites States to be at the bottom rung of the western world. Private health care is profit driven, such that if you happen to be a millionaire, the US is a great place to get care, but for anyone who isn’t a millionaire, countries with universal health care are better; fact sheets and statistics from all international health organizations and watchdog groups back this up incontrovertibly.
To finish, I’d like to note that a nation whose affluent citizens help support a health system that takes equal care of everybody, including the poor who could not otherwise afford good care, sounds like much more a Christian nation than one whose health care is based on payments, premiums, and profits. Go see the movie, and check Moore’s facts independently. Anyone with an open mind will find it compelling.
Better than Average / 4½
Other than that, and perhaps slightly longer hospital wait times, I’d say Canada’s system is leaps and bounds better on the whole. Bottom line, /everybody/ gets the care they need, including high quality and comprehensive emergency care. No premiums, no bill, no mucking around with money in any way. A note to all the “reviewers” who’ve not even bothered to see the film, its primary theme is that while universal health care is a tax burden, it takes care of the poor and helpless in times of need in a way private health care simply does not. Universal health care removes profit from the equation, and thus prevents the well-off from buying their way to good health care, while the less-well-off are left behind to struggle with the overwhelming debts that inevitably come from even small procedures.
As a Canadian, I can say from first-hand experience that I’ve had nothing but fantastic health care—I go to the doctor on occasion, and I’ve even had to go to the emergency room a couple of times (once for a nasty flu bug, and another for a broken leg). I bring my care card (a health ID card), fill out a history, and they give full treatment. Since I’m a young student with a low income, I do not pay income taxes yet. Most of the tax burden is supported by those with good and wealthy incomes, in order that everybody is taken care of in this nation without exception. The story that Canada’s system is broken, bad, worse than America’s, too expensive, etc. is solely perpetuated in the United States for reasons I don’t fully understand. Suffice to say, it is a false story. Take a look at WHO reports on patient care, wait times, success rates, infant mortality, etc. and you’ll find the Unites States to be at the bottom rung of the western world. Private health care is profit driven, such that if you happen to be a millionaire, the US is a great place to get care, but for anyone who isn’t a millionaire, countries with universal health care are better; fact sheets and statistics from all international health organizations and watchdog groups back this up incontrovertibly.
To finish, I’d like to note that a nation whose affluent citizens help support a health system that takes equal care of everybody, including the poor who could not otherwise afford good care, sounds like much more a Christian nation than one whose health care is based on payments, premiums, and profits. Go see the movie, and check Moore’s facts independently. Anyone with an open mind will find it compelling.
Better than Average / 4½
Jared, age 22
Positive—The film was very good…
Good / 5
Good / 5
John, age 26
Positive—I am an American who lived for 6 months in England, studying at a university. While I was there, I became extremely ill with a serious bacterial stomach infection, and I was able to experience the National Health Care system first hand. The first thing that I noticed was that the care was not quite as professional as I was traditionally used to in the states, but that was only when I was treated at the university’s medical clinic, which I have found is not up to par at my university here in America as well. When I was sent for treatment at the local health center, the care was quite good and nearly identical to that here. The second thing I must tell you is that I was completely broke when I was in England, and as a poor student unable to even splurge on fast food or shopping, I had absolutely no means of paying for expensive medical treatment had I been forced to pay for it. I was extremely grateful that I was treated for no cost, and I literally don’t know what I would have done had it not been for the National Health Service. I would have been sick and scared and unable to help my self.
That story is honestly true, …Jesus came to this Earth to save souls and (that’s right) cure the sick. “Sicko” is a movie that all Christians should see, regardless of political sympathies.
Good / 4½
That story is honestly true, …Jesus came to this Earth to save souls and (that’s right) cure the sick. “Sicko” is a movie that all Christians should see, regardless of political sympathies.
Good / 4½
Doug Coleman, age 24
Positive—I went to see this movie with low expectations, and was pleasantly surprised. “Sicko” is incredibly thought-provoking. Is it biased? You bet it is. But that doesn’t stop it from raising many very real, serious issues about our country’s health care system. I did some independent research after seeing it, reading articles and talking with people who stand on all sides of the health care debate. Because of what I learned, I changed many of my views on health care. You owe it to yourself to give this movie a chance.
Better than Average / 4
Better than Average / 4
Chris, age 20
Neutral
Neutral—I was bored yesterday so I went to see “Sicko.” On seeing this it made me realize in what a great country we live in and that anybody can express their opinion in this matter. In some countries back in the days a person would be shot for something so atrocious as this character propaganda. Michael Moore is a committed leftist who dislikes this country that has made him such a wealthy man. He is not celebrating the virtue of self-sacrifice with this movie, rather the socialist health care systems adopted in other cultures. It’s widely known that he does not embrace an honest or has any official recognition, but he weaves a tapestry of lies through carefully selected video and audio clips, narrating the story he wants to tell-never mind the facts.
Self-sacrifice is fine, a Saintly virtue to be true, but where is it written that all people have the right to demand the goods and services of others without having to pay for them? That’s essentially what advocate of socialized medicine want-for people to demand the goods and services of medical professionals without having to pay for anything out of their own pockets. Nowhere in the Bible can you justify that. It’s a recipe for disaster, as Canada, Britain, and others have discovered-but you won’t see that in 'Sicko.'
A car is almost a necessity now, as is the personal computer. What if I were to demand universal car care, or universal computer care, without wanting to pay for it myself? It’s the same difference. …We would do better to introduce more market forces into the system rather than government control. The latter will only mess things up even more, hurting-and killing-more people in the process. Erwin (the Ambassador of Sensitivity) NY
Extremely Offensive / 1
Self-sacrifice is fine, a Saintly virtue to be true, but where is it written that all people have the right to demand the goods and services of others without having to pay for them? That’s essentially what advocate of socialized medicine want-for people to demand the goods and services of medical professionals without having to pay for anything out of their own pockets. Nowhere in the Bible can you justify that. It’s a recipe for disaster, as Canada, Britain, and others have discovered-but you won’t see that in 'Sicko.'
A car is almost a necessity now, as is the personal computer. What if I were to demand universal car care, or universal computer care, without wanting to pay for it myself? It’s the same difference. …We would do better to introduce more market forces into the system rather than government control. The latter will only mess things up even more, hurting-and killing-more people in the process. Erwin (the Ambassador of Sensitivity) NY
Extremely Offensive / 1
E b, age 48
Negative
Negative—Terrible film. …
Extremely Offensive / 1
Extremely Offensive / 1
Jonathan Tran, age 26
Comments from non-viewers
Michael Moore is a committed leftist who hates the country that has made him such a wealthy man. He is not celebrating the virtue of self-sacrifice with this movie, rather the socialist health care systems adopted in other cultures. It’s widely known that he is not an honest documentarian, but he weaves a tapestry of lies through carefully selected video and audio clips, narrating the story he wants to tell—never mind the facts.
Self-sacrifice is fine, a Godly virtue to be true, but where is it written that all people have the right to demand the goods and services of others without having to pay for them? That’s essentially what advocates of socialized medicine want—for people to demand the goods and services of medical professionals without having to pay for anything out of their own pockets. Nowhere in the Bible can you justify that. It’s a recipe for disaster, as Canada, Britain, and others have discovered—but you won’t see that in “Sicko.”
A car is almost a necessity now, as is the personal computer. What if I were to demand universal car care, or universal computer care, without wanting to pay for it myself? It’s the same difference. Don’t be deceived by Mr. Moore’s self-titled film (jibe intended). Watch it if you feel you must, but know that every word in it is a lie, including “and” and “the.” Our system of health care delivery isn’t perfect, but it’s certainly not broken. We would do better to introduce more market forces into the system rather than government control. The latter will only screw things up even more, hurting—and killing—more people in the process. Thanks for considering the other side of this issue.
Self-sacrifice is fine, a Godly virtue to be true, but where is it written that all people have the right to demand the goods and services of others without having to pay for them? That’s essentially what advocates of socialized medicine want—for people to demand the goods and services of medical professionals without having to pay for anything out of their own pockets. Nowhere in the Bible can you justify that. It’s a recipe for disaster, as Canada, Britain, and others have discovered—but you won’t see that in “Sicko.”
A car is almost a necessity now, as is the personal computer. What if I were to demand universal car care, or universal computer care, without wanting to pay for it myself? It’s the same difference. Don’t be deceived by Mr. Moore’s self-titled film (jibe intended). Watch it if you feel you must, but know that every word in it is a lie, including “and” and “the.” Our system of health care delivery isn’t perfect, but it’s certainly not broken. We would do better to introduce more market forces into the system rather than government control. The latter will only screw things up even more, hurting—and killing—more people in the process. Thanks for considering the other side of this issue.
Carrie Rostollan, age 38
I can understanding someone wanting people to be aware of Mr. Moore’s political leanings and biases but to claim that everything is a lie without even seeing the film is a bad and false witness. Definitely Mr. Moore is biased… like HMO’s and health care and drug manufacturer CEOs and their compadres are objective? Does Carrie really believe they and the lobbyists and politicians have shaped the current medical system based on “moral integrity and fairness” rah, rah, rah. Are the people who’ve lost children and the firefighters just being immoral marxist freeloaders for complaining on not just “taking it on the chin” for capitalism [and the CEO’s vacation house and kids private school and trust fund so the kids never have to work]… rah, rah, rah.
Does she think the reviewer has become a lazy marxist because he sees some merit in presenting that there is a problem, injustice, etc? If Michael Moore said 2+2=4 should we dismiss it because he is incapable of telling the truth? The Bible I read is of a person who freely healed the sick and the lame and did urge them to come to them. Perhaps, I missed the part about Christ denying healing because they couldn’t come up with their co-pay.
Capitalism is the best economic system; economic system Carrie, not moral system. I worship a living God not capitalism or socialism or other ultimately man-made or corrupted ism.
My morals aren’t determined by the market. Where in the Bible is that? I won’t sit and be content to see someone die or heroic people denied because the “market” says so. Does that mean that we should wholesale adopt whatever Mr. Moore or others want. No way. What kind of knee jerk thinking is that? HINT: the thinking of Rush Limbaugh, the “holy man” of the 'moral, objective' capitalism [thug capitalism] uberalles cult.
So sure, tell people to beware of bias and question the effectiveness of solutions that Mr. Moore would advocate or steer people towards. That’s fair. But don’t irresponsibly dismiss or ignore the seriousness and unfairness of the cases presented, when you have not seen the movie? And don’t behave like “capitalism” [as determined by wealthy, self-righteous pharisees] is the be all/end all, untouchable, unquestionable touchstone of modern civilization and moral behavior.
It’s not unquestionable nor untouchable. I will not make it a Golden Calk. I will not idolize it and absolutely repudiate and denounce the false prophets that do. Based on the review, I don’t see evidence of being biased to like Moore and his agenda. In contrast, bias, prejudgment and wrongful and heartless narrow mindedness drips all over Carrie’s capitalism uberalles, Rush Limbaugh schtick. The review and the fanatical denouncement has sealed the deal for me. I wasn’t planning to go see it, but now I will.
Does she think the reviewer has become a lazy marxist because he sees some merit in presenting that there is a problem, injustice, etc? If Michael Moore said 2+2=4 should we dismiss it because he is incapable of telling the truth? The Bible I read is of a person who freely healed the sick and the lame and did urge them to come to them. Perhaps, I missed the part about Christ denying healing because they couldn’t come up with their co-pay.
Capitalism is the best economic system; economic system Carrie, not moral system. I worship a living God not capitalism or socialism or other ultimately man-made or corrupted ism.
My morals aren’t determined by the market. Where in the Bible is that? I won’t sit and be content to see someone die or heroic people denied because the “market” says so. Does that mean that we should wholesale adopt whatever Mr. Moore or others want. No way. What kind of knee jerk thinking is that? HINT: the thinking of Rush Limbaugh, the “holy man” of the 'moral, objective' capitalism [thug capitalism] uberalles cult.
So sure, tell people to beware of bias and question the effectiveness of solutions that Mr. Moore would advocate or steer people towards. That’s fair. But don’t irresponsibly dismiss or ignore the seriousness and unfairness of the cases presented, when you have not seen the movie? And don’t behave like “capitalism” [as determined by wealthy, self-righteous pharisees] is the be all/end all, untouchable, unquestionable touchstone of modern civilization and moral behavior.
It’s not unquestionable nor untouchable. I will not make it a Golden Calk. I will not idolize it and absolutely repudiate and denounce the false prophets that do. Based on the review, I don’t see evidence of being biased to like Moore and his agenda. In contrast, bias, prejudgment and wrongful and heartless narrow mindedness drips all over Carrie’s capitalism uberalles, Rush Limbaugh schtick. The review and the fanatical denouncement has sealed the deal for me. I wasn’t planning to go see it, but now I will.
Richard Hoover, age 40
Positive—In response to Ms. Rostollan, “Sicko” is actually full of documented facts. Although Moore has a history of twisting the truth to fit his mindset, this movie avoided that for the most part and numerous articles in the press have verified that the assertions he makes are true.
Seconding what Anthony said, cars and computers are by no means necessities (I honestly can’t imagine a realistic situation in which I would need either one to stay alive), but the quality and availability of health care is often the only thing standing between life or death for some unfortunate people. Is letting people die from an inability to obtain healthcare because their brothers and sisters in Christ were too unwilling to share a little out of their pocketbooks a Christian ethic? God calls us to reach out to the less fortunate in our daily lives, whether or not some would call it socialism.
In the end, the only criticism of this movie is pure vitriol (someone who disagrees with you does not necessarily hate everything you align yourself with) fueled by politics rather than morality, and anyone actually willing to take the time to see this movie will probably agree with the reviewer.
Good / 4
Seconding what Anthony said, cars and computers are by no means necessities (I honestly can’t imagine a realistic situation in which I would need either one to stay alive), but the quality and availability of health care is often the only thing standing between life or death for some unfortunate people. Is letting people die from an inability to obtain healthcare because their brothers and sisters in Christ were too unwilling to share a little out of their pocketbooks a Christian ethic? God calls us to reach out to the less fortunate in our daily lives, whether or not some would call it socialism.
In the end, the only criticism of this movie is pure vitriol (someone who disagrees with you does not necessarily hate everything you align yourself with) fueled by politics rather than morality, and anyone actually willing to take the time to see this movie will probably agree with the reviewer.
Good / 4
Frank, age 18
Positive—Michael Moore is a church-going Catholic… He knows God is not a Republican and certainly not a capitalist. He knows the Christian right is a profit-based business more skilled at making shallow appeals to broad swaths of people than any political organization in U.S. history. One of the major goals of “Sicko” is to make a movie for people of faith who see through the absurd linkage of Christianity and capitalist health care. In her negative comments, a reader says that every word in “Sicko” is a lie. “Sicko” states over and over again that the U.S. is the only industrialized Western country to not have free, universal health care. Does the commenter think this is a lie? Either the U.S. indeed holds that awful distinction or it does not. (It does.) Either we routinely deny people necessary medical care to save their lives or we do not. (We do.) It’s also true that the routine national pushes for privatizing health-care even more are completely separate from any conception of benevolence or social justice. We can’t just walk away and call Michael Moore’s film a lie, patting ourselves on the back. It’s a serious film about a serious matter, and Christians should watch it very carefully.
Excellent! / 5
Excellent! / 5
Eric S., age 19
Response from Carrie Rostollan: Let me draw a parallel for you folks who are ripping me up both sides over my comments. When Oliver Stone’s movie says that JFK died, yes, that’s true. Nevertheless, when he adds, “and it was a government conspiracy and coverup,” that is a lie.
Likewise, Michael Moore makes selective attacks against the United States health care system (and they may be true), but then he jumps to the conclusion that national socialized medicine would be better. That is a lie.
There are tradeoffs in everything. Free markets aren’t perfect, but for my money socialist systems are much worse. Eric S. claims that 'we routinely deny people necessary medical care to save their lives,' as if that’s never done in Canada, Britain, or France. (It is.) Here, compassionate Christians have created organizations like MediShare (www.medi-share.org) which fulfills the commands of Christ in this area as a ministry. We need more of that, not more government control of the system.
Richard H. speaks of Christ healing the sick and never demanding a co-pay. This is true, but Jesus never advocated a takeover of the Roman medical system (was there one?) by the government, either. I find Richard’s argument strewn with gaping defects in logic. The truth is that Americans are the most content in the world with their health care (so says the World Health Organization, which in its rankings is biased towards socialized medicine).
People in Canada wait for routine procedures like MRIs, often for months. Many Canadians cross over into the U.S. to pay for treatments rather than wait for the tax-funded care to begin. Britain has a severe shortage of dentists; France a shortage of doctors and nurses. These problems may kill more people than those who fall between the cracks in our American system. You can’t “take the profit” out of any product or service without severely wounding or losing that product or service.
“Michael Moore glosses over the ugly parts of socialized care and then uses WHO rankings to embarrass the United States. …Some questions he raises are provocative, even if his solutions are wrong”—John Dawson, World Magazine, July 14, 2007.
Read that review if you can. …
Likewise, Michael Moore makes selective attacks against the United States health care system (and they may be true), but then he jumps to the conclusion that national socialized medicine would be better. That is a lie.
There are tradeoffs in everything. Free markets aren’t perfect, but for my money socialist systems are much worse. Eric S. claims that 'we routinely deny people necessary medical care to save their lives,' as if that’s never done in Canada, Britain, or France. (It is.) Here, compassionate Christians have created organizations like MediShare (www.medi-share.org) which fulfills the commands of Christ in this area as a ministry. We need more of that, not more government control of the system.
Richard H. speaks of Christ healing the sick and never demanding a co-pay. This is true, but Jesus never advocated a takeover of the Roman medical system (was there one?) by the government, either. I find Richard’s argument strewn with gaping defects in logic. The truth is that Americans are the most content in the world with their health care (so says the World Health Organization, which in its rankings is biased towards socialized medicine).
People in Canada wait for routine procedures like MRIs, often for months. Many Canadians cross over into the U.S. to pay for treatments rather than wait for the tax-funded care to begin. Britain has a severe shortage of dentists; France a shortage of doctors and nurses. These problems may kill more people than those who fall between the cracks in our American system. You can’t “take the profit” out of any product or service without severely wounding or losing that product or service.
“Michael Moore glosses over the ugly parts of socialized care and then uses WHO rankings to embarrass the United States. …Some questions he raises are provocative, even if his solutions are wrong”—John Dawson, World Magazine, July 14, 2007.
Read that review if you can. …
Carrie Rostollan
Comments from non-viewers
IF IT QUACKS AND WALKS LIKE A DUCK—I find both Laura’s and Carrie’s responses disingenuous. Carrie comes in, fully admitting she hasn’t seen the film, and not simply warns of Mr. Moore’s bias but: 1) claims Michael Moore lies about EVERYTHING… her words, not mine; 2) tells people not to see the film; and 3) gives a pro “capitalism” statement which in words and tones dismiss the idea that any serious problems worth changing exist and shows no sense of humility that there may be flaws and bias in how 'capitalism.'
And Laura incredulously claims there is no right wing bias in Carrie’s behavior as well as incredulously admonishes that others should not use the review section to post political statements… as if Carrie’s post was not pure political statement where she admits she didn’t see the film.
How can someone be that blind? Seriously. I don’t know how else to respond. How on Earth does someone read Carrie’s initial post and comes away saying it’s just her critics posting political biased statements without seeing the film? I would honestly have fired Laura as an analyst. She would be on the street right now with such a ridiculously one sided defense.
As incredulous, Carrie talks about gaps in logic, making reference to one statement about Christ to somehow and behaving as if she’s refuted the numerous rebuttals to her capitalism uberalles schtick.
Hey Carrie, what about the gaps in logic when I say its absolutely fair to point out and warn people about Moore’s bias? That illogical to you?
Or that it is fair to advise people to consider the solutions that Moore may want and their effectiveness? That illogical to you?
My statement makes clear reference to the validity to warn about bias and urge people to be wary and think about the solutions Moore might advocate.
I am clear in not going rah, rah, for Moore; clear in validating the fairness of being critical of Moore.
My criticism of Carrie is not that she is critical of Moore but 1) her over-the-top and irresponsible manner [including saying that he lies about everything, refusing without even seeing the film to dismiss any merit] and 2) her over-the-top blind defense of modern 'capitalism.'
In contrast to my review, no where do I see Carrie recognizing and validity in critique and change. Instead, her statement is pure rah, rah drivel to make it seem that it would rain cats and dogs if we even dare consider changing the present system [unless the solution is more 'capitalism'].
NOTE IN HER “REBUTTAL” Carrie NEVER REFUTES my accusations of her behaving as if capitalism is some untouchable, uncriticizable idol, that must always be turned to.
After what Jesus did to the money changers in the Temple, Carrie and Laura should be concerned about giving an impression of bastardizing Christianity into a worship of capitalism.
In Jesus day, He summed up the guilt of the Pharisees that they acted like people exist to serve the law, rather than that the law exists to serve the people.
Today, Modern Day Pharisees act like people exist to serve capitalism, rather then capitalism exists to serve people.
I feel absolutely no inconsistency with Jesus’s behavior to call out and confront such false prophets based on how Jesus dealt with Pharisees.
If she is supposedly a Christian, Carrie needs to get over her ego and stand up, take ownership and repudiate:
1) her ridiculously zealous claims that Moore lies about everything;
2) her ridiculously judgmental and slanderous implication that those who have criticisms or want change just want to, in effect, steal from others and otherwise, have zero merit; and
3) the impression she gives that capitalism is beyond criticism, reform and reconsideration; that she recognizes it is made to serve people and when it isn’t, then it absolutely is valid to criticize it and explore other solutions.
In contrast, I have for the umpth time made it absolutely clear that it is valid to be wary and critical of Moore, that does not excuse over-the-top, overly judgmental and one-sided, rah, rah capitalism behavior like Carrie’s or intentional blindness and one sidedness like Laura’s.
And Laura incredulously claims there is no right wing bias in Carrie’s behavior as well as incredulously admonishes that others should not use the review section to post political statements… as if Carrie’s post was not pure political statement where she admits she didn’t see the film.
How can someone be that blind? Seriously. I don’t know how else to respond. How on Earth does someone read Carrie’s initial post and comes away saying it’s just her critics posting political biased statements without seeing the film? I would honestly have fired Laura as an analyst. She would be on the street right now with such a ridiculously one sided defense.
As incredulous, Carrie talks about gaps in logic, making reference to one statement about Christ to somehow and behaving as if she’s refuted the numerous rebuttals to her capitalism uberalles schtick.
Hey Carrie, what about the gaps in logic when I say its absolutely fair to point out and warn people about Moore’s bias? That illogical to you?
Or that it is fair to advise people to consider the solutions that Moore may want and their effectiveness? That illogical to you?
My statement makes clear reference to the validity to warn about bias and urge people to be wary and think about the solutions Moore might advocate.
I am clear in not going rah, rah, for Moore; clear in validating the fairness of being critical of Moore.
My criticism of Carrie is not that she is critical of Moore but 1) her over-the-top and irresponsible manner [including saying that he lies about everything, refusing without even seeing the film to dismiss any merit] and 2) her over-the-top blind defense of modern 'capitalism.'
In contrast to my review, no where do I see Carrie recognizing and validity in critique and change. Instead, her statement is pure rah, rah drivel to make it seem that it would rain cats and dogs if we even dare consider changing the present system [unless the solution is more 'capitalism'].
NOTE IN HER “REBUTTAL” Carrie NEVER REFUTES my accusations of her behaving as if capitalism is some untouchable, uncriticizable idol, that must always be turned to.
After what Jesus did to the money changers in the Temple, Carrie and Laura should be concerned about giving an impression of bastardizing Christianity into a worship of capitalism.
In Jesus day, He summed up the guilt of the Pharisees that they acted like people exist to serve the law, rather than that the law exists to serve the people.
Today, Modern Day Pharisees act like people exist to serve capitalism, rather then capitalism exists to serve people.
I feel absolutely no inconsistency with Jesus’s behavior to call out and confront such false prophets based on how Jesus dealt with Pharisees.
If she is supposedly a Christian, Carrie needs to get over her ego and stand up, take ownership and repudiate:
1) her ridiculously zealous claims that Moore lies about everything;
2) her ridiculously judgmental and slanderous implication that those who have criticisms or want change just want to, in effect, steal from others and otherwise, have zero merit; and
3) the impression she gives that capitalism is beyond criticism, reform and reconsideration; that she recognizes it is made to serve people and when it isn’t, then it absolutely is valid to criticize it and explore other solutions.
In contrast, I have for the umpth time made it absolutely clear that it is valid to be wary and critical of Moore, that does not excuse over-the-top, overly judgmental and one-sided, rah, rah capitalism behavior like Carrie’s or intentional blindness and one sidedness like Laura’s.
Richard Hoover, age 40
When I wrote the review for this movie, I expected to receive some criticism in the comments section. What I didn’t expect was such a heated exchange to follow between the commenters. I don’t plan on siding with anyone, but I would like to remind everyone that we as Christians are judged by the things we say and do. And to be honest, I’m disappointed by some of the things I see written in these comments. I love to see people of various viewpoints discuss their points of view in a civil manner, but personal attack should never take place among followers of Christ.
Chris Sosa, age 17
Mr. Hoover, I find your comments off the mark. Mr. Moore’s reputation for stretching the truth to lying in his films is well known. With that in mind and coupled with the Mr. Moore’s pre-release and post release comments; an informed opinion can be formed. A case in point is look at the piece done on CNN with Mr. Moore. Mr. Moore’s belligerent behavior when confronted with facts that he did not agree with; he demeaned the health correspondent and went on ranting/raving that if you disagreed with him you were some type of shill for the medical industry.
In his movie he touted Cuba as a place that would give better care for “his patients” than they got in America. In fact, they did not get better treatment. CNN even went as far as to issue a rebuttal to Mr. Moore, pointing out that in many areas where Mr. Moore had a disagreement with CNN there was no disagreement. Yet they did show where Mr. Moore selectively took facts and compared them with other facts that were not comparable. Yet when people point this out they are demonized. Thus even when Mr. Moore may say 2+2=4, he is already a suspect source that has little credibility. That stems from his past works intentionally using misleading information.
I found various statements that you have made to be rather troubling. Your mention those who lost children and firefighters and then contrasting them to CEO’s vacation houses, trust funds and private schools that seemed to smack of envy and coveting.
Your statement of “I don’t see evidence of being biased to like Moore and his agenda. In contrast, bias, prejudgment and wrongful and heartless narrow mindedness drips all over Carrie’s capitalism uberalles, Rush Limbaugh schtick.” shows a bias of your own. The same type that you has said others have displayed. Other statements that you attribute to others are just not there which appears to be bearing false witness.
The other posters have not said capitalism is perfect. Nor have they have said it is a moral touchstone either. Also no one has stated that morals are determined by the marketplace. Yet morals are written in the Bible that applies directly to you as an individual and not a man-made government system. The bible does state that we as Christians and we as the church have a responsibility to help others not a government.
The fact that Christ healed others physically was more of a statement that he can heal you spiritually. Something a co-pay, no matter how large, can ever do.
Your assertion that others are giving an impression of bastardizing Christianity into a worship of capitalism is wrong. No one has said that Christians and the church should not be involved or that when we are we should charge a premium. They have argued that a socialist system, which Mr. Moore touts, has more faults that the system we have.
The analogy you gave “In Jesus day, He summed up the guilt of the Pharisees that they acted like people exist to serve the law, rather than that the law exists to serve the people.
Today, Modern Day Pharisees act like people exist to serve capitalism, rather then capitalism exists to serve people.” is not correct. The Law was given by God thus Jesus’s rebuked the Jewish religious leaders what was being done in religious terms. Capitalism as you have pointed out is a man created institution. Thus as Jesus said render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s because that is man’s government not God’s. That is why the Christians as the Church are directed to provide for the “Poor and Widows”.
Finally, your last set of statements you made was beyond the pale. The things you accuse the other posters of are exactly what you have committed. Your posts show envy, and bearing false witness.
The other posters are sharing their opinion that Mr., Moore does not have any valid solutions based upon his record to date. The information Mr. Moore has release prior to the film does provide enough information to make the kinds of judgments that the other posters have made nor were they over the top.
Let’s put the argument into the proper terms. We have all seen what countries who have embraced socialism are like. Capitalism by far is better at building a country and society. But neither of them is moral. That is where God comes in. He has set forth Laws for the individual to follow. Unfortunately, because of sin we are not able to follow them. Thus Christ comes and pays the price for our freedom. Through his life, we see how we as individuals and the church are to act towards others. Therefore when you see others in need, the church needs to act. The individual Christian needs to act. These actions are not dependant upon what programs government has for them or what programs we can create through government. Listen to the song “We Are the Body’ by Casting Crowns. That is a model of what the Christian community should be doing. Imagine every church member gaving a faithful tithe. Then imagine each church getting involved in their community by addressing the needs of those who are sick and ill. That model in itself is better than anything that Mr. Moore can present in his movie “Sicko.
In his movie he touted Cuba as a place that would give better care for “his patients” than they got in America. In fact, they did not get better treatment. CNN even went as far as to issue a rebuttal to Mr. Moore, pointing out that in many areas where Mr. Moore had a disagreement with CNN there was no disagreement. Yet they did show where Mr. Moore selectively took facts and compared them with other facts that were not comparable. Yet when people point this out they are demonized. Thus even when Mr. Moore may say 2+2=4, he is already a suspect source that has little credibility. That stems from his past works intentionally using misleading information.
I found various statements that you have made to be rather troubling. Your mention those who lost children and firefighters and then contrasting them to CEO’s vacation houses, trust funds and private schools that seemed to smack of envy and coveting.
Your statement of “I don’t see evidence of being biased to like Moore and his agenda. In contrast, bias, prejudgment and wrongful and heartless narrow mindedness drips all over Carrie’s capitalism uberalles, Rush Limbaugh schtick.” shows a bias of your own. The same type that you has said others have displayed. Other statements that you attribute to others are just not there which appears to be bearing false witness.
The other posters have not said capitalism is perfect. Nor have they have said it is a moral touchstone either. Also no one has stated that morals are determined by the marketplace. Yet morals are written in the Bible that applies directly to you as an individual and not a man-made government system. The bible does state that we as Christians and we as the church have a responsibility to help others not a government.
The fact that Christ healed others physically was more of a statement that he can heal you spiritually. Something a co-pay, no matter how large, can ever do.
Your assertion that others are giving an impression of bastardizing Christianity into a worship of capitalism is wrong. No one has said that Christians and the church should not be involved or that when we are we should charge a premium. They have argued that a socialist system, which Mr. Moore touts, has more faults that the system we have.
The analogy you gave “In Jesus day, He summed up the guilt of the Pharisees that they acted like people exist to serve the law, rather than that the law exists to serve the people.
Today, Modern Day Pharisees act like people exist to serve capitalism, rather then capitalism exists to serve people.” is not correct. The Law was given by God thus Jesus’s rebuked the Jewish religious leaders what was being done in religious terms. Capitalism as you have pointed out is a man created institution. Thus as Jesus said render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s because that is man’s government not God’s. That is why the Christians as the Church are directed to provide for the “Poor and Widows”.
Finally, your last set of statements you made was beyond the pale. The things you accuse the other posters of are exactly what you have committed. Your posts show envy, and bearing false witness.
The other posters are sharing their opinion that Mr., Moore does not have any valid solutions based upon his record to date. The information Mr. Moore has release prior to the film does provide enough information to make the kinds of judgments that the other posters have made nor were they over the top.
Let’s put the argument into the proper terms. We have all seen what countries who have embraced socialism are like. Capitalism by far is better at building a country and society. But neither of them is moral. That is where God comes in. He has set forth Laws for the individual to follow. Unfortunately, because of sin we are not able to follow them. Thus Christ comes and pays the price for our freedom. Through his life, we see how we as individuals and the church are to act towards others. Therefore when you see others in need, the church needs to act. The individual Christian needs to act. These actions are not dependant upon what programs government has for them or what programs we can create through government. Listen to the song “We Are the Body’ by Casting Crowns. That is a model of what the Christian community should be doing. Imagine every church member gaving a faithful tithe. Then imagine each church getting involved in their community by addressing the needs of those who are sick and ill. That model in itself is better than anything that Mr. Moore can present in his movie “Sicko.
Matthew Cowan, age 38
While I haven’t viewed Mr. Moore’s movie (and I never will), I have followed the media coverage concerning his latest mocumentary. Personally I find MR. Moore to be Extremely Offensive. Even the Main Stream Media, that LOVES him for his mocumentary 'Farfromtruth 9/11', is calling him to task on some of the blatant errors, misrepresentation, and creative video editing in his latest effort. …The U.S. would be a much better place if Mr. Moore and all of his Ilk (Hollywood LIEberals) packed up and left.
Bill Cody, age 51
…Sicko' is another example of Moore’s bias. I am critical of the flaws in our Health Care system, but am also realistic as to how it compares to others systems around the world. An anaology would be Winston Churchill’s famous quote about Democracy 'It is the worst form of government—except for all others.' I personally know other physicians from various countries and their view of their countries Nationalized Health Care is far, far different from Moore’s. (one small example with photos on THE REAL CUBAN HEALTH CARE can be viewed on www.josue.townhall.com)…
L. Andrews MD, PhD, age 61
And going back to Ms. Rostollan’s comments, I find it very unfair to compare a personal computer or a car to health care. I did talk to my pastor about this film, and we both seemed to agree. When small childen die in this country because they’re denied the medications they need to live because big insurance businesses wanna keep your $$$$, that’s a serious issue. (If you’re denied a personal computer-which isn’t a necessity-you don’t get to check your email.) And it was a one Moore was trying to point out. If only he could make more films like this and stay away from politics, he’d be a much better film maker. I don’t think Michael Moore hates this country. I think he hates the corrupt industries that are hurting US citizens, and I think he hates that not enough is being done to make things better.
My Ratings: Better than Average / 5