Captain Mike Across America

This film is told in montage about Michael Moore's failed attempt to rally voters, mostly young college-aged voters, who he calls "slackers", who haven't participated in past Presidential elections to come out and vote for John Kerry in the 2004 election. It is framed this way in the very opening of the film, thus setting it as a time capsule at a, arguably, turbulent time in America.

But due to this being first released in September 2007, in Canada, makes me come to the conclusion that this film provides nothing concerning its subject matter. A few IMDb reviews see this film as helping Obama win in 2008 and could be seen as a rallying call to young voters in future elections. I disagree.

Even though the film was re-released in 2008 in the United States, a little over a month before the '08 election, for free mind you, it doesn't help make the case to "go out and vote". It's so focused on anti-Bush/pro-Democrat that it's hard to make that case.

It also makes it hard to find value in watching it years later. Great documentaries have re-watch value in either the evolution of the subject matter over time or any historical insights that are introduced, explored, or discovered in the film or over time.

I see two ways to make the film better.

First, If you keep the majority of the film together, the whole anti-Bush point of view, then make the case by showing "here is where we were in 2004 after one term under Bush and trying to change the tide. We failed. Now look at where we are now at least halfway through a second term." From here you can frame it to help Obama in 2008 and onward.

Second, If you really want to make the point of the film to just be a rallying call for non-voters and new voters to get out and vote, you have to be apolitical about it and be fair. Don't lean so heavy into the anti-Bush/pro-Democrat angle but do show what America looked like and felt in the lead-up to the '04 election. Especially since the driving force behind the election was the Iraq War.

Any open minded person, whether Democrat or Republican, wouldn't get any worth out of this. Especially the further away we get from that point in time. Even if you are anti-bush, either back then or now, it doesn't make a difference. For me, the decisions Bush made and the war seem justified at the time but in hindsight things should've been different. However, it doesn't necessarily mean Kerry most definitely had to win.

If you have to, find it for free, as it was originally released in the US.

Michael Moore traipses across the battleground States to visit 60 cities before the 2004 election and passes out Ramen noodles and clean underwear to slackers who will promise to register and vote.

This film about his journey is just as relevant as it was four years ago. This year's election will also turn on getting the slackers out from behind their X-Boxes and get them to vote.

A combination of speeches, great music, film clips, interviews with regular folks, this was a film for all those who want their country back.

It's yours to watch for free at http://slackeruprising.com/

I voted against Bush in 2004, but the film was actually pretty boring and didn't bring anything new to the table. He had promised he'd throw his next documentary online, maybe he threw out this stuff because he didn't want to skimp out on the earning potential of an actual decent documentary he's making.

I had thought he was making a documentary showing all the things corporations have been getting away with in the last four years, but actually it's about Michael Moore's tours around the country for the 2004 elections. Literally it's just footage of his speeches to different universities and local press conferences when he toured several cities in swing states. Moore didn't present anything new we hadn't been hearing for the last 8 years and he said absolutely nothing about the 2008 candidates.

The format of the video was depressing. Moore says bring back the troops, kick out bush for a while to a cheering audience, it shows a random musical guest or celebrity then it shows a news caster talking about what the polls show to give a little time effect. While there's nothing particularly wrong with format, that's all there is to this film, it just repeats over and over as he tours different cities.

What the heck just happened? The blip.TV embed does not allow seeking so I couldn't just skip to the end to see if he had something more aggressive or interesting up his sleeve. Moore is know for stirring up controversy and attacking what he feels are the "bad guys" straight-on. There was no face-to-face talks and interviews, only speeches to loving supporters and in a few instances, quips to the opposition that also showed up. He should have made a real documentary or at least critical review of the 2008 candidates, the slacker uprising could have been a DVD extra at best. Edited footage of him as super hero almost changing the tide in the swing states will only gain support from the hardcore Michael Moore fans. Moore brags in the film about how 30 - 40% of republicans that watched Fahrenheit 911 ended up liking it. The same cannot be said for this film. There is no investigative journalism like his previous documentaries. It's Moore talking to his supporters and registered democrats in addition to having the benefit of editing his "best of" moments.

Republicans that watch it will only get annoyed. The film starts by saying Kerry was in the lead until the Bush admin ran an unfair smear campaign on Kerry. Kerry did nothing and his popularity dropped among veterans. Moore countered this pretty well in the movie, but he didn't counter the footage of Kerry saying he would have voted for the war even if he knew the intelligence was false at the time. A few moments in the film would drive zealous republicans crazy like: allowing a guest to sing the Finland national anthem to a confused crowd that wasn't properly told why, his comments on immigration, some of Roseanne's over the top jokes, and finally Moore insanely accepted, I believe it was, a bronze star that belonged to the grand father of one of the people in an event. Literally a guy went up and offered a family war metal from a deceased relative. I cringed as Moore seem to give as little humility to it as someone offering to pay for his dinner, "Really are you sure? Wow thanks." It's a waste. People fight to defend their country but more so to defend their family. You just can't take something so personal to someone's family history when its completely meaningless to yours. Democrats who watch this movie will get bored, since it's the same rhetoric we've already heard. Go watch several of Obama's speeches or check his website instead of watching this movie. Republicans who watch it will get annoyed and have more to complain about, further outlining the divisions between the parties that we should instead work to break.

I lean pretty far left politically, and parts of this low-key made me like the Democrats less. I used to not care about politics, and didn't lean either way... and if I'd seen this during that stage of my life, it would've made me feel even less compelled to go out and vote.

I've liked every Michael Moore movie I've seen so far. Bowling For Columbine and Fahrenheit 9/11 are among the best documentaries of their decade. This is the first film of his I've seen that I'd call bad. My ratings on this site are all public- you can see how positively I've rated all his other documentaries, if you need to.

It's barely a film, and it's so strange that it came out years after the events it depicts, when the 2004 election was well over. I've seen worse documentaries I guess, but this honestly wasn't very good at all. Nothing particularly funny, nothing particulalty clever. Even Michael Moore In Trumpland is significantly better, more engaging, more useful, and better thought out than this one.

Oh and the music sections were so awful, and I reckon just there to get it to feature length.

I won't call it the worst documentary I've ever seen, because I think it had somewhat good intentions... but of the political documentaries I technically "agree" with, I think it's the worst. Skip it, even if you're a fan of Moore like me.

I'm a rather serious fan of Moore's work and lean heavily liberal in my politics. And even so, this film got tedious and felt very self-serving on Moore's part. There are good parts, no doubt, but did we really need to see him signing autographs and hugging women with "Hug me Michael" signs? What on earth is that besides self-aggrandizement? I can't imagine what he was thinking other than "I need some more filler here."

Michael: We've seen you do better. Much better. And your timing here is very suspect--you are releasing this in the final days of the 2008 election season because you think people will, in their fervor, watch your film for some input about the election. Yet you have little-to-nothing to offer. You're looking four years in the past here while Obama is looking forward. Sure, your message "the young should vote" is currently applicable, but I think Mr. Obama has already done an amazing job of getting that out.

Overall, this is somewhat interesting for us die-hards, but I can't see it being all that captivating for the masses.