Roger und ich

I grew up near Decatur, Il, a city that was devastated in the late 70's and 80's by downsizing in the auto industry, the migration of jobs south of the border, and corruption in the giants of agribusiness. The city's economy has never really recovered and has been on the frontlines of the labor battles of this country, while the national media has ignored it. It bears a close parallel to Flint, Michigan, as depicted in "Roger & Me.

Moore goes back to his hometown and sees the effects of massive job loss, created by a company that cared more about executive stock options and bonuses, than the community it lived in. We meet people who have lost their jobs, benefits, and homes as a result of short-sighted decisions. With few alternatives that pay a living wage, the community spirals into decline. We see the arrogance of wealth, via lavish parties, while the poor are evicted from their homes. We watch as city leaders concoct one bizarre cosmetic scheme after another, without ever addressing the real roots of the economic problems of the city.

The film makes many valid points which still hold true and still occur. You can find fault with Moore's "ambush" approach and mockery of celebrities; but, Moore has usually made civil efforts to talk with these individuals, only to be ignored or driven off. So, he resorts to grandstanding tactics which brings attention to the issues he is pursuing. Also, the celebrities are so generally caught up in their own self importance, that they deserve the skewering they receive.

You can fault Moore's tactics and selective portrayal of an issue, but he does provoke discussion, which is usually his aim. In this, he is following the great tradition of the muckrakers, like Upton Sinclair, who were able to stimulate argument on vital topics and effect positive change. Moore is a great filmmaker and thought-provoking figure. Love him or hate him, he makes you focus on issues. Too bad politicians and executives don't.

Michael Moore recounts his prosperous working middle class life as a child in GM company town of Flint, Michigan. Everybody worked for GM except for Michael. He leaves his small paper he created to go to San Francisco. It doesn't go well and he returns to Flint. In 1985, GM CEO Roger Smith closes factories in Flint. Michael goes on a quest to get an interview with Roger Smith.

The criticism has centered on Michael Moore's manipulation of events in the movie. It's a valid argument if this is being measured against traditional documentaries. As a journalistic documentary, this has many flaws and possibly fatal flaws. As a reality-TV persuasion, this is a real ground breaker. While not every line is correct, the overall sentiment hits on a greater truth. Michael may portray himself as the underdog but he's a real giant.

This movie really showed me what America's free enterprise system is about. Make your millions in producing automobiles in an American town, then run to Mexico where labor is cheap, and not offer any jobs to Americans. I loved it, very true, very deep.

I loved how Roger Smith dodged the film crews everytime they showed up. It was very good to show the effects of the plant closing shop. I never expected a true look into what happends to American workers.

I give this one 5 stars, and I realize now that our Free Enterprise System just keeps the poor, poor. And the wealthy get even more wealth. Our free enterprise system is a joke.

...Michael Moore should have stuck to the facts. I lived in the Detroit area (Milford, the home of the GM Proving Grounds) from the early 70's until 2002. The 80's were a rough decade for the auto industry.

Roger Smith became Chairman and CEO of GM in January, 1981. The man was an unmitigated disaster. Among some of the things he proposed was the elimination of GM's engineering division (pink slipping everyone). He didn't think that the world's largest automaker needed an in-house engineering capability. Absolutely moronic!

There were several other examples of Roger Smith's buffoonery. The viewing audience would have been better served had Mr. Moore stuck to the facts. There were several items in this film that were either staged or flat-out false (people who never worked for GM getting evicted, Pres. Reagan being quoted out of context, etc.). This is the typical tactic Mr. Moore uses in all his films.

The upshot? Mr. Moore is a gifted filmmaker and able storyteller. Unfortunately, he doesn't let the facts get in the way of the point he's trying to make. There was no shortage of material on what a moron Roger Smith was (is?). Had Mr. Moore kept with the facts, Roger & Me would not just be entertaining, it would have the added benefit of being factual.

This documentary focuses on a decision made by the CEO of General Motors, Roger B. Smith, to close several factories in Flint, Michigan and essentially lay off 30,000 workers who lived there. This decision had a catastrophic consequence for the city and to all of the people who lived there. But what I believe is even more important is that this documentary shows something that most people who embrace "free-market capitalism" don't fully appreciate and that is the difference between "stockholders" and "stakeholders". One would think a responsible corporate executive would realize that these two groups don't have to be mutually exclusive. Yet, even though this one decision was certainly bad for Flint, Michigan another aspect that people also don't see-and one that was not addressed in this video-is that this particular decision was one of many mistakes made by Roger B. Smith which eventually earned him the distinction of being named one of the "Worst American CEOs of all time" by CNBC. But I suppose in the minds of certain people since he and his buddies made millions everything is okay. Such is the mindset of the ignorant. At any rate, this was a good film and I have rated it accordingly. Above average.