Love and Money

I skipped Michael Moore's most recent documentary in the theaters, but it recently arrived on DVD and I decided to give it a shot. Capitalism: A Love Story is his look at the financial state in America, of the eroding middle class, the widening gap between the wealthy and impoverished, and the questioning of whether capitalism is all it's cracked up to be. Capitalism, the movie posits, does not go hand in hand with democracy as a force for good.

The film is an interesting collection of contradiction. On the one hand, it's almost Moore's least political film in a long while (certainly, among those I've seen). But it's actually an intensely political film; it's just that he goes after a number of targets without regard to their political affiliation. Oh, there's plenty of vitriol for the Bush (Jr.) administration, and even several shells lobbed back at Ronald Reagan. But if you make it past the first half hour, there are actually a good number of jabs at Democrat politicians, not just Republicans. Among the people he vilifies most for the banking crisis were members of Bill Clinton's cabinet, and it was a Democratic majority in Congress that passed the recent stimulus/bailout package of which -- "spoiler" alert -- Moore is not a fan.

He has longer sequences in this film where he "steps away" from the action, neither appearing on camera nor narrating the proceedings. The movie is unquestionably at its strongest in these moments, depicting real people in a variety of awful situations: a couple being paid token amounts a mortgage company to act as low-priced movers carrying out the eviction on their own house; several families relating tales of how corporations cashed in massive life insurance policies on dead spouses while leaving the bereaved penniless; case after case of insult piled upon injury.

But on the other hand, when he does appear on screen -- in fact or in narration -- Moore is more Moore than ever before. He marches up to corporate headquarters with his megaphone and camera crew, accomplishing nothing but grandstanding for his film. He heaps criticisms on certain figures without necessarily providing sound logic or context for his accusations. This is Moore at his most polarizing, a man who knows very well how to paint a picture, but far less well how to present an argument.

Frankly, even I -- someone who shares a great many of the man's political views -- found the first third or so of the movie rather off-putting. It was preaching to the choir, firing off shots indiscriminately. But then the movie settled into really humanizing the situation, and finally segued into a pretty compelling condemnation. It was fairly short of suggestions for solutions, though, other than a vague "rise up" call to arms without much of a notion of "and do what?"

It's hit and miss, with most of the misses being all front-loaded in the opening act. That might make it tough for some to get through, and undoubtedly even worse for those predisposed not to like Moore's films in the first place. If you see it through though, I'd call it a B-.