A list of lies and untruths in Michael Moore’s Sicko

A movies, parody post by matt, posted on June 27, 2007 at 11:57 pm



Michael Moore’s feature-length documentary films are synonymous with one thing: lies. Before Moore started making films, documentaries were always 100% factual. Except for maybe Triumph of the Will, of course. That one took some liberties. But regardless, one of the things the internet has proven itself good at — in addition to pornography and pictures of cats with writing on top of them — is debunking the ‘truth’ in Michael Moore’s movies.

As I recently saw an advanced screening of Michael Moore’s latest, Sicko, which purports to be an ‘attack’ on the American health insurance and health care system, I thought I would take the opportunity to take a first crack at revealing the lies, untruths, mistruths, fibs, omissions and biasedness inherent to this vaguely cinematic work.

Noted Lies from Sicko

Nine Fingers Is Not Music To My Ears!

At 3:15, Moore interviews a man with only nine fingers. He does so while the man is holding a guitar. The odds of a nine-fingered man actually playing a guitar are slim to none. This is similar to another mistruth in Bowling for Columbine, when Moore interviewed Charles Heston while the great actor was trying to be lucid.

A Snow Job?!

At 4 minutes in, Moore shows a scene of a couple moving to Denver, CO. At 4:01, they are on a sunlit highway clear of debris. At 4:04, they are pulling in to a snow-covered driveway. The only possible explanation for this is camera trickery.

Hoop Dreams? More like Hoop NIGHTMARES!

At roughly 10 minutes in, Moore films a young boy shooting basketballs by himself. The kid appears to make a relatively difficult shot despite having incredibly poor form. It definitely looks like some sort of camera editing was used to make this young boy — a liberal — look better at basketball (or ‘hoops’) than he actually is.

The Computer Wore HEINOUS shoes!

At 11:32, Moore shows what is supposed to be his computer screen as he receives thousands of e-mails from fans. An exhaustive search of the internet shows no trace of any e-mail client that looks anything like what Moore is using, leading me to conclude that he has doctored a made-up e-mail client in order to make it look like he has a lot of e-mails.

A CHILD anti-depressant!

Between 14:25 and 14:40, Moore plays the familiar and classic theme music from Star Wars over a list of scrolling health conditions that disqualify customers from getting health insurance. This is an obvious and disingenuous attempt to sway the younger audience to his misguided cause. But there is nothing here about intergalactic civil war; there is nothing here for children to enjoy at all.

Life is What You FAKE of it!

At about the twenty minute mark, Moore interviews a mustachioed man who claims that he formerly worked for a big health insurance company. The interview takes place in front of a rock and some reeds, to give the impression that this is a down-home ‘country’ and ‘wholesome’ kind of interview. Looking closely, however, that could so be a fake rock. Or it could have just been a museum exhibit or something. There’s no way of knowing, especially considering Moore’s constant use of camera tricks.

A DOG gone lie!

At one point in the opening of the film, Moore shows a dog wandering around an empty urban space, possibly scrounging for food. Whose dog is that?! What is the dog doing there?! What happened to the dog after the movie?! Moore does not say.

Against all GODS!

At the 24 minute mark, Moore begins a sequence in which he interviews a young adult woman whose husband died because he had cancer. This sequence is deceitful for two reasons. First, because it depicts a white woman who was married to a black man, something that is so uncommon outside of urban areas as to be statistically irrelevant — something Moore conveniently neglects to mention — and second because her husband’s death clearly is used to play on our emotions, whereas interviewing a couple where both members were alive would have far less emotional impact. To be fair, Moore should have interviewed a healthy single-raced couple so that the viewer could decide for themselves which they want to support.

Hillary HOGHAM Clinton!

At 32:50, Moore refers to Hillary Clinton as ‘sexy’ despite the mounting evidence against this.

Cana-DUH, he is lying!

Throughout the movie, Moore gives praise to the socialized medicine system in Canada, even going so far as showing a woman crossing the border for supposed ‘free’ care. The entire sequence in Canada, however, is unconvincing. Moore conveniently avoids showing anything that would actually indicate the surroundings as Canadian. There is no snow. The wildlife shown is neither dam-building nor antler-having. The police officers shown are all wearing blue, not red. Much of the infrastructure surrounding the economy seems to be suspiciously Americanized. These shots could have easily been fabricated in a soundstage somewhere — Moore certainly gives no indication to the contrary. Given his past history, I think it’s safe to say that this is all staged

Onion Ring of Lies!

Shortly after the first sequence in Canada, Moore shows what appears to be giant onion rings and refers to them as ‘Canadian food.’ None of the research I did on Canada indicated that giant onion rings were particularly popular in Canada. Another clue that perhaps all of the Canada scenes were staged in a closet-set soundstage and edited with a blue, or maybe green, screen.

Doct or FRAUD?

At the one hour mark (approx.), Moore spends a lot of time interviewing a supposed British doctor who speaks of the wonders of nationalized healthcare systems. All this, and yet we never see any kind of medical license. He is not even wearing a white coat. Instead, he is wearing a purple shirt, which is dubious by itself, and speaking in a funny accent, unlike any established doctor I’ve ever been associated with. I’m not saying that Moore paid some actor to pretend to be a doctor in his film, but it does seem entirely plausible and extremely likely that Moore paid some actor to pretend to be a doctor in his film. That would go a long way toward explaining the homosexual shirt.

A little warm in HELL?

At 1 hour and 7 minutes in, Moore interviews a British politician who is, for unknown reasons, wearing his coat indoors. What’s the deal with that? You’re indoors. Take your coat off.

An obvious FAUX-PAW

At 1 hour 20 minutes, Moore interviews a bunch of ‘French’ people from ‘France’ who are not, in fact, speaking French. Could he make his staged scenes any more clear?

Suspicious Open Spaces In Your FACES!

Further, minutes after the above false sequence, Moore interviews another French woman, who talks of her level of satisfaction with her life in France. All of this goes on while, in the background, it is clear that the woman owns absolutely NO FURNITURE AT ALL. She is literally living in an empty house. That’s crazy! And yet Moore does nothing to comment on the fact that this woman has likely been so beaten down financially (and, possibly, sexually, given the lack of father in the interview) by socialism that she cannot even afford to decorate her own home.

The Great Cuba Swindle

I can’t even begin to expose the number of falsehoods surrounding the last third of the movie, wherein Moore takes a bunch of supposed 9/11 rescue workers to Cuba for medical treatment. First, that doesn’t look like Cuba at all. By the age of the cars shown on the streets, I would estimate that it is instead 1950s Iowa. It reminds me of something out of Tennessee Williams play. Or, rather, it would, if I had read or seen any of those plays. I have not. Because I’m not a liberal.

Also: has anyone stopped to consider what actually makes someone a 9/11 rescue worker? Does anyone who was down there, picking up rocks, qualify? If you wandered about, calling random names, looking closely for bodies, does that make you a rescue worker? Because that really doesn’t seem right. If my neighbour’s house catches on fire and I opt to turn my sprinkler system on as a courtesy to him, that doesn’t make me a fire fighter. At best it makes me a marginal hero. The real rescue workers, in my opinion, actually rescued people. Just as the real fire fighters are actually in my neighbour’s house, smashing things up with their axes and smothering people with blankets to put out blazes.

Thirdly, it sure did look like Moore was driving one of those boats. This is obviously another camera trick, as clearly no one as urban and well-fed as Moore could ever drive a boat. This is just another simple fact that was, once again, glossed over in Moore’s overzealous quest to make his liberal argument.

There Will Be More Moore Lies!

I could likely keep going, but I only want to waste so much time on this sorry excuse for a ‘documentary’ ‘film’. I will, however, keep all you readers updated as the summer progresses, bringing you truth wherever lies prosper.

Stay strong!

Matt