Where to Invade Next marks something of a change for Michael Moore. Although it features his usual snark and left wing views, it takes a more serious approach to its subject than previous Moore outings. Moore visits various countries, mostly in Europe, to show government policies he thinks the United States should adopt. Among the countries he visits are Italy, France, Slovenia, Iceland, Finland, and Tunisia.
Rather than examining every aspect of the countries he visits, he focuses on one or two policies he thinks are especially important. For example, in Italy, he looks at the amount of vacation time allotted to workers and the strength of Italian unions. Conservative critics will inevitably complain that he fails to give consideration to the flaws of these countries. However, Moore himself admits in the film that none of the countries profiled are perfect.
Moreover, Moore at times goes out of his way to explore the most challenging aspects of the other countries' policies, including aspects most Americans wouldn't be comfortable with. For example, when discussing the Norwegian criminal justice system, he considers the light twenty-one year sentence given to Anders Brevik, the white supremacist terrorist who killed over seventy people. As Moore makes clear, even policies he supports have downsides.
Over all, the film is well worth watching and shows a more serious side of Moore as a filmmaker. That said, towards the end it starts to suffer from pacing issues, and the film could easily have been ten to fifteen minutes shorter. I personally would have ended the movie with the interview with the Icelandic banker who describes why she wouldn't have wanted to live in the United States. What she said summed up the film as a whole and would have made a perfect conclusion.
Rather than examining every aspect of the countries he visits, he focuses on one or two policies he thinks are especially important. For example, in Italy, he looks at the amount of vacation time allotted to workers and the strength of Italian unions. Conservative critics will inevitably complain that he fails to give consideration to the flaws of these countries. However, Moore himself admits in the film that none of the countries profiled are perfect.
Moreover, Moore at times goes out of his way to explore the most challenging aspects of the other countries' policies, including aspects most Americans wouldn't be comfortable with. For example, when discussing the Norwegian criminal justice system, he considers the light twenty-one year sentence given to Anders Brevik, the white supremacist terrorist who killed over seventy people. As Moore makes clear, even policies he supports have downsides.
Over all, the film is well worth watching and shows a more serious side of Moore as a filmmaker. That said, towards the end it starts to suffer from pacing issues, and the film could easily have been ten to fifteen minutes shorter. I personally would have ended the movie with the interview with the Icelandic banker who describes why she wouldn't have wanted to live in the United States. What she said summed up the film as a whole and would have made a perfect conclusion.