wildcard97

If you want to see the most perfect version of this story, watch the 1960 original with Spencer Tracy and Fredric March.

This version plays almost the exact same as the original. The only reason to watch this version is if you're a fan of the actors themselves and want to see their performances. Other than that, there's no real rewatch value. But that's not to say it's a bad movie because it's still the same story told greatly.

An equivalent I can think of would be the 1998 remake of Psycho where they recreated it shot for shot to where it's virtually pointless to watch it, especially more than once.

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.

This movie has balls. Big balls.

Not only does it tackle a topic that people aren't typically comfortable talking about, but it effectively pulls on your emotions as a decent human being who wouldn't dare wish such trauma on young children. It's the only time in a theater I heard people gasp and wince at what they were seeing. The movie doesn't show anything explicit, it's either talked about in dialogue (even then the actual language is pretty tame not going into specifics) or it leads up to a scene and cuts to the aftermath allowing you to fill in the blanks yourself.

Due to the explicit nature of the topic and content, not only is it necessary to not show the children directly in these sexual abuse situations but any person with a good moral conscience and common sense will have emotions of anger, sadness, and shock at these scenes.

The only other movie to cover the topic of sex trafficking that comes to mind is Taken with Liam Neeson but that plays as your typical action movie with no substance to hold thereafter.

And the only movie that comes to mind that talks about a sensitive topic while not being gruesome visually rather than in dialogue and implication is Gosnell with Dean Cain, though I didn't see that in theaters so I wonder if the audience reaction would've been, audibly, the same.

This movie should be seen by a vast majority of people, parents especially. I don't have kids but I was pissed at these horrible characters. I can only imagine how an actual parent would feel.

This movie should be the starting point of having an actual conversation and dialog about the current state of child and sex trafficking both in the U. S. and the world.