ThiefHott Too much of everything

TaryBiggBall It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

BeSummers Funny, strange, confrontational and subversive, this is one of the most interesting experiences you'll have at the cinema this year.

Matho The biggest problem with this movie is it’s a little better than you think it might be, which somehow makes it worse. As in, it takes itself a bit too seriously, which makes most of the movie feel kind of dull.

david-sarkies What does one do when one makes a bucket load of money from a movie were you whinge and whine about how progress has destroyed your home town, and you spend an hour and a half fictitiously chasing the CEO of a major corporation and make it appear on camera that he does not want to talk to you? - More of the same.Basically this film is about a book tour where Michael Moore travels across the United States holding signings and conferences about a book that he wrote called Downsize Me, and spends all of his time criticising Corporate America. Now don't get me wrong, I am a big fan of criticising corporate America because the nature of the system which is based on greed and on lining the pockets of a minority to the expense of the majority is something that needs to be criticised – it is just that I don't like it when Micheal Moore does it because it is becoming clear that the only reason he is doing it is because people pay him money to watch his movies and to read his books.The question that I have is what does Michael Moore do with all the money that he makes from these enterprises? I know I won't be able to ask him because he doesn't like to give interviews in exactly the same way that the CEOs he chases allegedly don't like to give interviews. I suspect the reason that he doesn't like to give interviews, and the reason that CEOs don't like to give interviews to him, is because they do not trust him and they do not know how he is going to manipulate the stock footage that has been taken of those interviews to his own advantage.Anyway, the whole idea of downsizing and moving to Mexico (or other developing countries) is a double edged sword. Manufacturing in America (and in Australia) is a dying industry because it is much cheaper to move it overseas. Further, the costs of setting up factories are so much cheaper because the laws that surround workplace rights and health and safety do not exist, and without tariffs, companies are simply going to behave like water, and that is move to where it is cheapest. Personally I do not like it, but that is the way it is happening. Basically in the modern democracy the unskilled labour is moving to the service industry, and skilled labour is going to a knowledge base (though workers in the construction industry are still needed because you simply cannot off shore them).Once again, it is difficult to tell what is true and what has been manipulated in this film. For instance, it is quite clear that the interview with Phil Knight has been edited to bits to simply show us that he does not care about the conditions of the workers in Indonesia, and that he does not want to open factories in the United States because people in the United States do not want to make shoes. However Knight is right when he says that people who are unemployed will say they want to do any job, yet it is also true that it is so much cheaper to employ people in Indonesia and import the shoes than to pay people in the United States to do it. Unfortunately, it is not necessarily the CEOs and executives that are doing this but the super funds and managed investments that are forcing the companies to do this because they want their returns and us, the people who hold the shares and who have financial stakes in those funds what our returns as well.

lastliberal Before he hit it big with his latest documentaries, Michael Moore made this one as he traveled to 47 cities promoting his book "Downsize This!" If you get nothing else out of the film, the exchange with Studs Terkel in Chicago says it all. He talks about the Oklahoma City Bombing and the loss of 168 lives. At the same time, a plant closes in Flint and the building is destroyed. The only difference is that they lay off all the workers so no one was left in the building. Which is terrorism? The result of the layoffs will be suicide, child abuse, spousal abuse, etc. Isn't the corporation guilty of economic terrorism?The next most important thing to take away is the fact that we pay corporate welfare to companies like McDonalds and Pillsbury to promote their products overseas. Do they share the resulting profits with the American taxpayer who paid for their advertising? You know the answer to that.Michael Moore is a real American hero and I just hope he keeps sticking it to the greedy SOBs that are stealing from this country.Not as slick as his latest documentaries, but all of them are worth watching. beats watching Tampa bay beat up on the Redskins.

Thomas Teuber As one user before said, he feels the film to be more of a time capsule today, since the impacts and importance of downsizing has been overwritten by other issues like terrorism, homeland security, 9/11 etc.Well, I live in Europe and I can just say that here in Europe the film just comes out on DVD (I saw it only yesterday, July 15th, 2004 on TV) at the right time for Europe (if not a little too late). Economical matters are getting worse here in Europe day by day, and the patterns CEO's use to make their companies "profitable" (which should just always correctly read: "MORE profitable) are just the same as CEO's use in the USA. In fact, the only idea that comes to their minds is: downsizing, laying off people and transferring labour into countries with extremely cheap labour-cost. That's all.Surprisingly there is just very little resistance to these tendencies, even though Europe is (in most countries) far better organised as far as Labour Unions are concerned. People are told by politicians that reforms are necessary, and people just sit back and accept it and continue to suffer.In this context, "The Big One" by Michael Moore just comes at the right time here in Europe, even though I think that not many of the concerned people will actually see it.But it's worth watching it, even though sometimes I questioned myself how I could laugh over such sad facts. But this is the virtue of Michael Moore and this film: it doen't leave you desperate, it gives you a laugh at the time and maybe, if we're all lucky, it will lead to a better organisation of the people concerned and to more resistance against the 1 percent of the rich keeping the rest in poverty.

Agent10 Michael Moore's second film is a little more accessible than the original, but at least he takes on the private sector with the same vigor he showed in the first film. Often times dragging, the big moment in this film is Moore's interview with NIKE founder Phil Knight. Not only is this part shocking, it redeems a film that lags in some spots. A solid follow-up to Moore's first film and his television show TV Nation.