New Michael Moore Film

[Grumble]

Sent to people on his mailing list. Strange days indeed:

 

Friends,

 

It's a wrap! My new film, "Sicko," is all done and will have its world premiere this Saturday night at the Cannes Film Festival. As with "Bowling for Columbine" and "Fahrenheit 9/11," we are honored to have been chosen by this prestigious festival to screen our work there.

 

My intention was to keep "Sicko" under wraps and show it to virtually no one before its premiere in Cannes. That is what I have done and, as you may have noticed if you are a recipient of my infrequent Internet letters, I have been very silent about what I've been up to. In part, that's because I was working very hard to complete the film. But my silence was also because I knew that the health care industry -- an industry which makes up more than 15 percent of our GDP -- was not going to like much of what they were going to see in this movie and I thought it best not to upset them any sooner than need be.

 

Well, going quietly to Cannes, I guess, was not to be. For some strange reason, on May 2nd the Bush administration initiated an action against me over how I obtained some of the content they believe is in my film. As none of them have actually seen the film (or so I hope!), they decided, unlike with "Fahrenheit 9/11," not to wait until the film was out of the gate and too far down the road to begin their attack.

 

Bush's Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson, launched an investigation of a trip I took to Cuba to film scenes for the movie. These scenes involve a group of 9/11 rescue workers who are suffering from illnesses obtained from working down at Ground Zero. They have received little or no help with their health care from the government. I do not want to give away what actually happens in the movie because I don't want to spoil it for you (although I'm sure you'll hear much about it after it unspools Saturday). Plus, our lawyers have advised me to say little at this point, as the film goes somewhere far scarier than "Cuba." Rest assured of one thing: no laws were broken. All I've done is violate the modern-day rule of journalism that says, "ask no questions of those in power or your luncheon privileges will be revoked."

 

This preemptive action taken by the Bush administration on the eve of the "Sicko" premiere in Cannes led our attorneys to fear for the safety of our film, noting that Secretary Paulson may try to claim that the content of the movie was obtained through a violation of the trade embargo that our country has against Cuba and the travel laws that prohibit average citizens of our free country from traveling to Cuba. (The law does not prohibit anyone from exercising their first amendment right of a free press and documentaries are protected works of journalism.)

 

I was floored when our lawyers told me this. "Are you saying they might actually confiscate our movie?" "Yes," was the answer. "These days, anything is possible. Even if there is just a 20 percent chance the government would seize our movie before Cannes, does anyone want to take that risk?"

 

Certainly not. So there we were last week, spiriting a duplicate master negative out of the country just so no one from the government would take it from us. (Seriously, I can't believe I just typed those words! Did I mention that I'm an American, and this is America and NO ONE should ever have to say they had to do such a thing?)

 

I mean, folks, I have just about had it. Investigating ME because I'm trying to help some 9/11 rescue workers our government has abandoned? Once again, up is down and black is white. There are only two people in need of an investigation and a trial, and the desire for this across America is so widespread you don't even need to see the one's smirk or hear the other's sneer to know who I am talking about.

 

But no, I'm the one who now has to hire lawyers and sneak my documentary out of the country just so people can see a friggin' movie. I mean, it's just a movie! What on earth could I have placed on celluloid that would require such a nonsensical action against me?

 

Ok. Scratch that.

 

Well, I'm on my way to Cannes right now, a copy of the movie in my bag. Don't feel too bad for me, I'll be in the south of France for a week! But then it's back to the U.S. for a number of premieres and benefits and then, finally, a chance for all of you to see this film that I have made. Circle June 29th on your calendar because that's when it opens in theaters everywhere across the country and Canada (for the rest of the world, it opens in the fall).

 

I can't wait for you to see it.

 

Yours,

 

Michael Moore

 

P.S. I will write more about what happens from Cannes. Stay tuned on my website, MichaelMoore.com.

[Gladys]

led our attorneys to fear for the safety of our film, noting that Secretary Paulson may try to claim that the content of the movie was obtained through a violation of the trade embargo that our country has against Cuba and the travel laws that prohibit average citizens of our free country from traveling to Cuba. (The law does not prohibit anyone from exercising their first amendment right of a free press and documentaries are protected works of journalism.)

So illegally detaining people there under inhumane conditions and without trial for almost 6 years isn't trade? I suppose not.

[Declan]

It's a US military base. It's on island of Cuba but not in the country Cuba. I think it's a remnant of the pre-Castro times, and the US weren't about to give to pull out just because the surrounding countryside had gone Commie. I imagine all supplies are flown in from the mainland.

[Gladys]

Yes, interesting conundrum there, really, Declan. What is the basis of US presence there? A lease, a permission or exactly what? You would assume that they are paying the Cuban government something, may not be shekels, but perhaps something else? Transpose it the IOM, how happy would you be?

 

Probably taken this right off thread, but there has to be a reason why Guantanamo has been used and why there seems to be a link with the 9/11 workers.

[Chinahand]

As far as I'm aware re Guantanamo Bay its very similar to Hong Kong - a perpetual lease - I think it was signed at the end of the Spanish American War.

 

With Hong Kong the Chinese had the advantage that the New Territories were under a (later) 150 year lease and the clout to demand Hong Kong back with them - the Cubans don't!

 

Re: Mr Moore he's conflating freedom of speech with a commercial project and I'm not particularly convinced - its great publicity and links with his theme of evil governments stiffling his freedoms.

 

The US isn't an anarchy, its a state with clear laws that its citizens are under an obligation to follow. If they don't like a particular law then they can lobby and work to change those laws - if enough people support you the laws can changed - its called democracy and it is complicated with thousands of competing groups attempting to get its legislation passed.

 

I don't particularly approve but there are well established laws concerning the commercial relations US citizens can have with Cuba - mainly over compensation for US businesses and properties siezed by the Communists during the revolution.

 

Mr Moore may disagree with those laws, but he can't just flout them! He says he's done nothing wrong - well and good - but the law can't just ignore what he's doing if they suspect he's acting outside US law. Conflating that with his right to journalistic free speech is to me more than a little pompous and taking advantage of the free publicity the US Government has given him!

 

He's a master publicitist and a though provoking documentary maker, but he's getting just a bit of a matyr complex if you ask me.

[Declan]

It dates back to the Spanish-American War of 1898. Wiki says -

 

"By the war's end, the U.S. government had obtained control of all of Cuba from Spain. A perpetual lease for the area around Guantánamo Bay was offered February 23, 1903, from Tomás Estrada Palma, an American citizen, who became the first President of Cuba. The Cuban-American Treaty gave, among other things, the Republic of Cuba ultimate sovereignty over Guantánamo Bay while granting the United States "complete jurisdiction and control" of the area for coaling and naval stations."

 

Of course prior to the Cuban revolution the country had very strong ties with America, Castro is less enamoured with the idea, and has refused to cash the rent cheques.

[Slim]

My thoughts are similar to chinahands. There may be some truth behind the investigation, but the drama he's created around it stinks of publicity and hyping to me. Healthcare isn't a particularly exciting subject, and it looks to me like he's trying to sex it up.

[The Bastard]

It's a follow-up to something he did on his TV Nation series, comparing the health systems of the USA, Canada and Cuba.

 

Although Cuba actually won the healthcare challenge, the broadcasting authorities told them that they were not allowed to broadcast the result with Cuba in first place & they consequently had to re-edit the program to show that Canada won.

[sausage]

Surely the point of Michael Moores movies is that he wants as many of the public to view what he has uncovered and he feels to be unfair, immoral, dishonest or illegal.

 

Its therefore a bit like saying 'that band are publicity seekers playing gigs and appearing on telly and stuff' well errr yeah !!!