Documentary Capitalism: A Love Story by Michael Moore - Term Paper Example

26 February Process, Context, Framework and Production Elements Analysis on the Documentary “Capitalism: A Love Story” byMichael Moore As tens and hundreds of thousands Americans were losing their jobs during the early twentieth century, filmmaker Michael Moore shows President George W. Bush goofing and dancing around like a buffoon. This is the powerful image of capitalism’s negative features: the collusion between corporate America and the state, and the economic disparity between the rich and the poor, where the rich does not care what happens to the poor. This paper will analyze the documentary “Capitalism: A Love Story” by Michael Moore. It undertakes a detailed analysis of this documentary’s process, context, framework, and production elements. Moore’s documentary describes capitalism’s characteristics and criticizes its outcomes; it also argues that capitalism can be seen as the root of the global financial recession and widespread poverty in America, and that only democracy can help the disadvantaged sectors of society regain their basic human rights to life, liberty, and happiness. Analysis on Process This section analyzes the functions of the documentary. The purpose of the production is to describe and to criticize capitalism. On the one hand, it gives a denotative definition of capitalism as a means of making profit. It is supposed to be a simple economic system of give and take between capitalists and workers. On the other hand, the film provides connotative definitions of capitalism as a system of give-and-take, where taking from the poor is more pervasive. After showing examples of evicted people, the narrator helps its audience to visually understand what capitalism is about. The production also wants to compel people to revolt against this relentless and unjust taking nature of capitalism. Furthermore, the media communicator wants the audience to think about the capitalist system and why it is wrong. It wants the middle class to stop being complacent of their social status, because if some of the middle class easily became losers during the 2008 financial crisis, others can also fall into the same economic pit. Moore also wants the poor to fight back. It wants them to understand that they have rights to protect their homes and to lobby for safe and secure jobs. Moore wants people to receive information that would not have been found in mainstream media that corporations and banks control. The production wants to antagonize the people into action. It wants people to feel angry, sad, and unable to accept this kind of reality, a reality that is filled with people losing their jobs, sources of incomes, and properties, because companies and governments worked together to find better ways of making more money. For instance, if GM thinks that laying off people by the thousands will help it make more money, then that is the way it will pursue. Moore desires for people to be critical of the capitalist system’s profit motive. The film shows that there is nothing wrong with making some profit, but to make billions off the backs of displaced or un-unionized workers and evicted homeowners is not just. This makes capitalism wrong, as it focuses on making astronomical profits only on the short-run, without respecting the basic rights to life, liberty, and happiness of its workers or employees. The production has multiple functions and they are: 1) to educate the people about the conflicting strengths and weaknesses of capitalism, 2) to argue for the need of popular uprising against capitalist excesses, and 3) to find a way of changing the disadvantages of the current capitalist system. The latent function is that it somehow tells the people to not use violent means of resisting and changing the system, and yet showing guns and other weapons seems to indicate that civil unrest may be a potent means of achieving a more just economic system for the underprivileged sectors of society. The false function is that it appreciates the contributions of capitalism to human society. When the film uses an old video clip that discusses capitalism as giving the “highest standards in the world,” it has a non-diegetic comedic sound that trivializes this idea that capitalism is good. The production’s competing function is that it wants to serve as the means of democraticizing the economic system of society, and yet it cannot help but advocate a leftist and somewhat violent form of resistance to modern capitalism. This paper will now discuss the comparative media aspect of the film. The distinctive characteristics of the documentary are the montage of interviews, popular songs, clips, and images, and cross-cutting of historical and current parallels in society and the use of irony and parody in criticizing American capitalism. An example is the film’s analysis of President Bush’s speech, which lauds the advantages of capitalism. He says that capitalism is the “best system ever devised.” He underlines that “capitalism offers people the freedom to choose where they work, what they do.” Moore shows an example of a woman who has been scouring the classified ads every day for a job. But she cannot find any job that fits her knowledge and skills, which makes this clip insertion a parody of what Bush has been saying about employment opportunities. Bush also says that capitalism gives “the opportunity to buy products they want.” This is connected to video clip of a sign business that survives because of making more signs that say “Foreclosure.” Bush also says that the “free market system” will solve social injustice. Moore then shows a town in Pennsylvania that has the highest rate of young people locked up in the juvenile home. He demonstrates the irony between advertised social justice and actual injustice. This county in Pennsylvania hired a private company, PA Child Care, to take care of its juvenile delinquents. Moore says that these kids first learned the lesson of capitalism: “Time is money. Lots of Money.” The judge does not even listen to more than four minutes to these kids, because Moore shows that he receives money from PA Care for every child he locks up. The film cuts to Peter Zalewski’s company, “Condo Vulture.” He is a Florida real estate agent whose business gained a strong boost with the increasing number of foreclosures. He is not afraid to compare his business to a vulture that cleans the carcass of foreclosed property owners. He brags about how he makes money from other people’s woes. It is ironic that he makes sure that he clearly defines himself as a true vulture, because vultures are the ones not doing the killing, and instead, they are concerned of cleaning the killing. He stresses that “it is all about taking right now.” It is incongruous how he makes tons of money and buys new cars from helping foreclose properties. The huge losses of the many, as this film shows, results to the huge gains of the few. In addition, compared to other documentaries that focus only on the people or issue, this film includes old and new media content and popular communication strategies. In doing so, it intersects the past and the present and appeals to the masses. An example is when the old video clip asks what free enterprise is. It shows the interview with actor and writer Wallace Shawn who says that free enterprise is a “form of words” where one can picture “a kind of town with different shops where the guy who runs the best shop has more customers.” The main driving force of free enterprises is “profit motive.” The use of this popular actor is supposed to make people more interested in the issues of the documentary. The choice of medium affects the communication strategy, because the documentary has a populist appeal. It is not supposed to be purely dramatic, but wants to have an entertaining value that the masses have been used too. As a result, the communication style integrates documentary approach, where ambush interviews and other kinds of interviews are conducted, and the Hollywood style, where famous icons and music are used too. The medium also affects the content, because the documentary has to pack in diverse social and political issues that capitalism brings forth. The content then aspires to interconnect the various impacts of capitalism, such as exploitation, greed, and materialism. Some of these outcomes are higher rates of juvenile delinquency, higher foreclosure rates, and higher personal debts and bankruptcies. The main audience of the film is the general society, especially the middle and lower classes. The middle classes are targeted, because they have the resources to fight capitalism. The lower classes are also targeted, because they have a large stake in changing the system. The audience shares the values of hard work and justice of the filmmaker. They do not want welfare programs. They want to have decent jobs or livelihoods that can give them a decent life. They have also experienced different forms of exploitation and inequities, such as working for so long for a company, only to be terminated in three days notice and without expecting any severance pay and other benefits. The audience also shares the perspective that it is not right for firms and the government to focus on profits alone, because a socio-economic system should not serve the rich, but help all people access the opportunity to have a better life. The choice of audience influenced the strategy, style and content of the media presentation; because since the masses are the audiences, they need to feel that their values and experiences are represented in the film. Moore then uses media strategy that combines popular song and music, even to a YouTube effect. The style is also pop-based to entice and maintain the attention of the masses. He also includes his own experience to personalize his message and to emphasize ethos. He is showing that he himself is part of the working class and he knows how it feels to be used by the capitalist system. The content of the film also connects modern issues with its historical roots. The overall content serves to describe the evil of the capitalist system per se as a system: “Well, people want to believe that it’s not the economic system that’s at the core of all this. You know, it’s just a few bad eggs. But the fact of the matter is that, as I said to Jay [Leno], capitalism is the legalization of this greed” (Moore in Klein 14). Moore wants his audience to understand that capitalism itself is wrong, because it legalizes greed and exploitation and if he can show and prove this point to his target audience, then he has achieved his goal. Analysis on Context This paper proceeds to the historical content of the film. During the production of the film, the world is still struggling with the credit crisis in the U.S. and the global financial recession. The events of the day focus on the different causes of this economic crisis, such as greed and exploitation. As one article notes: Clearly inspired by America’s long-gestating financial collapse, which reached headline-news crisis status in September 2008, Moore’s new film scrutinizes America’s economic system, confuting the stereotyped notions (“the free enterprise system”) by which it is understood and enshrined, exposing its contemporary socially destructive aspects, and questioning its continuing viability (Crowdus 50). Crowdus stresses that Moore wants to paint the inevitable self-destructive path of capitalism in light of the global financial crisis. The global financial crisis only happened, as the film seems to argue, because capitalism has intensified in the U.S. and around the world. Prior events supported the outcomes of capitalism in the film, such as widespread foreclosure of properties and unemployment rates due to layoffs in the thousands or hundreds of thousands. Moore illustrates the role of Alan Greenspan and the U.S. Treasury in contributing to the United States housing bubble that demolished the American middle class. During this time, mortgage loan policies were loosened to encourage borrowing that cannot be evidently supported in the long run. Complex financial arrangements such as credit swaps were also made to cloud the underlying risks of these financial instruments. Moore also speaks with a previous employee at Countrywide Financial accountable for their VIP program for "FOAs" and details how many members of Congress and political figures got favorable mortgage rates under the program. During this presentation, many people from middle class and lower class social statuses are losing their homes. People who can relate to the new homeless of modern society will feel indignation because of how the state has treated them. As one man from Peoria, Illinois said, there has to be a rebellion between people who have nothing and people who have everything. He is also about to be displaced from his home in 30 days, even when he has no place to go. His wife says that when their property is taken from them, she will lose her heritage too, since their predecessors lived on the same land: “I have a lost a piece of my heritage. Why do you do this to the hardworking people? Why do you take everything?” Historical references are also made to compare and contrasts the state’s role in the economic and social welfare of their citizens. Moore made a comparison of the American automobile industry with German and Japanese counterparts. The German automobile unions have a say in firing and hiring the board of director to protect their welfare. The Japanese also ensure the protection of the middle class and workers through their workplace policies and practices. In these countries, the state supported industries and workers, and not just companies only. In America, Moore shows where plants were wiped out, such as the one where his father worked for thirty years. It is an example of how the state stopped promoting citizen welfare and became an arm of the ruling corporate and elite classes. One article, however, criticizes Moore’s lack of historical portrayal of facts as they are, due to the latter’s propagandist documentary approach: While critical viewing and context should be important considerations for the use of any film in an educational or informational endeavor, the standards must necessarily be set higher and questions of historicity must be entertained when dealing with documentary films, which are meant to depict people and events accurately and provide reliable information. (Douglas 282). Douglas mentions examples of Wal-Mart policies that were already removed years before Moore’s production. Douglas is not satisfied with the facts presented, or rather misrepresented, to produce an emotional impact on the audience. Analysis on Framework The introduction shows scenes of bank robbing. The essence of this introduction is to show that capitalism is about taking money from helpless people. It foreshadows the events of brutal and extensive “taking” that is present in capitalist society, particularly the taking of homes and jobs, which ultimately leads to the taking of human liberty, happiness, and life. The title “Capitalism: A Love Story” signifies the irony between the love that capitalism supposedly offers to the people and how it exploits and harms these people. The love story is a one-sided kind of love that the government, mass media, and corporations perpetuate. The premise of the presentation is that it starts with what capitalism promises to be and then proceeds to describing what it truly is. The premise is that capitalism is about profit only and as a result, it will continuously conflict with the human ideals of empowerment and freedom. There is logic in how Moore binds numerous social and cultural issues that result from the evil doings of capitalism. The impact of this premise on the messages conveyed in the presentation is that people are supposed to be shaken by the realization that they could be the next victims of capitalism. The significant events in the story are the range of consequences of the profit motive, which are job losses, increased homeless and poverty, and reduced human integrity. Moore wants his audience to feel anger, embarrassment, and dissatisfaction at certain points of the story. For example, he wants people to be embarrassed of presidents who allowed capitalism to use them for selfish materialist gains. The subplots are loss of humanity and the role of media in a capitalist society. The loss of humanity of middlemen can be seen from this film. Zalewski feels no remorse in being a drone. He does not even care when the other house has been on the fire. His main purpose is for using data to take properties at bottom prices. He is happy with the reality of lost homes and dreams, when he says: “Welcome to the housing crash, Miami style.” Another subplot is media and mass manipulation. Firms used the media “to remake America to serve them.” The documentary questions how the media used a popular icon like Ronald Reagan to marry politics and Wall Street. It says that when he won the presidency, the society lost itself to capitalism. It shows how Don Reagan, Chairman of Merrill-Lynch, became Treasure Secretary. Under his leadership, there has been a “wholesale dismantling of industrial infrastructure,” which is ironic, because other nations focused on industrial development instead. The genre of the firm combines action, comedy and drama. There is action during evictions and when Michael Moore goes to see the chairman of GM. Comedic rendition is applied too when guards called for affirmation of the meeting over radios. The drama of working class and their loss has been portrayed too, because of capitalism’s profit motive. Michael remembers picking up his dad and being excited whenever he and his family sees him coming towards them. The best memories of his dad were the people, because he enjoyed working with them. The film suggests that cultural attitudes and values of individualism have hurt the ability of people to work together for common goals. The cultural preoccupations of movies and sports served to distract the people from the real issues. As a result, the media, under the leadership of corporate firms, propagate the cultural myth that capitalism is empowering, when it is, in fact, disempowering the people. Analysis on Production Elements The cuts during the introduction and cross cutting show the parallel between the ancient Roman Empire and the current capitalist society. Cuts were also shown for the scene on Feb. 9, 2009, when an eviction occurred. The narrator stresses that there were “Four souls inside the house.” The sequence shot of sheriff in Lexington, North Carolina with seven cars establishes the collusion between the state and the economic system, which makes people vulnerable to the latter’s weaknesses. The people inside the house are saying that “This is America.” It criticizes how America is supposed to protect the “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” of its people, as stated in the Declaration of Independence. Sharp cuts are supposed to enhance the jarring experience of being evicted. The cuts with the evicted and the people doing the evicting are either shown in cross cuts or as part of the mise-en-scene. For the family being evicted in Peoria, the sheriff and his hulking official are shown, while the man who is being evicted has his back on the camera. The emphasis is on the evictees and how they are dehumanizing the evicted through implementing the eviction. Combinations of black and white and colored scenes are shown in the introduction where the ancient Rome clip was used and compared with modern society. The goal is to show the similarities between Rome and capitalist society, where greed, slavery, and exploitation are rampant. Colored scenes are mostly used for modern happenings, such as the boarding up of the house of a man who has lived in Detroit, Michigan for 41 years. The color enhances the reality of the state’s demolition of its citizens’ fundamental rights to life, which includes rights to shelter and protection of one’s home. When the film uses an old video clip that discusses capitalism as giving the “highest standards in the world,” it has a non-diegetic comedic sound that trivializes this idea that capitalism is good. The black and white color of this part ensures that these are traditional or old beliefs that modern conditions cannot support anymore. The documentary predominantly used natural lighting. For instance, examples of people being evicted from their houses used natural indoor and exterior lighting. The light expresses the rawness of what is happening now in the modern world, when the state cannot provide to the soon-to-be homeless. The shape of the film focuses on individual and their activities, as well as their challenges. An example is the shape of injustice as a family loses their land, which is their family heritage. They have nowhere else to go, and yet they still have to move out their property. Close-ups on people’s faces are often used to highlight their emotions. The film also emphasizes the effects of money-driven capitalism. The man says over the phone that someone else bought their house so it no longer belongs to them. At the same time, instead of 30-days notice, they are being evicted immediately. The film is saying that capitalism is about the winners of its system, the rich and the powerful who have the resources to claim the rights to life and happiness. Conclusion Moore argues that the capitalist system is not a just system. Through a series of montage shots, interviews, and self testimonials, the film describes capitalism’s characteristics and criticizes its outcomes. It is a film that reacts to and criticizes the global financial crisis. It contends that capitalism can be seen as the root of the global financial recession and widespread poverty in America. It recommends that democracy can help the disadvantaged sectors of society regain basic human rights to life, liberty, and happiness. Works Cited Capitalism: A Love Story. Dir. Michael Moore. Overture Films, 2009. DVD. Crowdus, Gary. “Capitalism: A Love Story.” Cineaste 35.3 (2010): 50-52. Print. Douglas, Andrew J. “Capitalism: A Love Story.” Journal of American History 97.1 (2010): 281-282. Print. Klein, Naomi. “America's Teacher.” Nation 289.11 (12 Oct. 2009): 11-15. Print. Read More