MovieChat Forums > Roger & Me (1989) Discussion > Pointless *beep*.

Pointless beep.

posted 20 years ago by paul-thompson
4 replies | jump to latest

I've always thought that perhaps Michael Moore should take a lesson in Microeconomics, this movie just proves it.

I remember liking this movie when I saw it early in College a few years ago. I found it darkly humorous and disturbing.

Since then I 've seen the 2 big moore projects, Columbine and 9/11. While the 2 movies do contain valid points, they are both, for the most part a ridiculous exercise in subjectivism and mean spirited manipulation.

So I decided to rewatch Roger and Me when it came on HBO signiture the other night.

While on the human level the film is affective - who doesn't feel for somebody who lost their job - the argument of the film is essentially a house of cards with no solid foundation.

I don't understand what Moore is trying to say about business in general and GM in particular. Is he making teh argument that GM should have kept the plants open? While it is true that the scumbag executives were living lavishly while the blue callar types were sent packing, it does not mention that the cost to operate the plants would make the cumulitive sum of all the executive's bonuses appear infinitesimally small. Beyond that Moore does not take into consideration the fact that there are tens of thousands of GM employees who were not laid off and who were not getting an executive's pay who's jobs were saved by the cost cutting actions taken.

In 1989, the quality of an American autombile (particularly GM and Chrysler) were *beep* compared to that of foreign made cars. This combined with the cost of a Toyota, for example, caused a cataclysmic shift downward in demand for US made cars. In order for the BIG 3 to compete they had to take enourmous cost cuting procedures, including bonuses for many executives. Thus, regardless of any step GM took that would have satisfied Moore, workers would have lost their jobs.

There was hardly any demand for Chevy's and Pontiacs, so it is only economically sound to keep a production line workforce that is capable of producing the needed amount of cars in the most cost effective manner.

What was GM supposed to do, pay people for doing nothing in the plants? If so there would be no GM today.

The reason why so many workers in the UAW were let go in the late 80's had little to do with corporate greed, and more to do a lack of foresignt in the US auto industry for over a decade leading up to the film's release. They could not compete with the innovation and business practises (dumping, which is illegal in this country for example) of the Japanese automotive manufacturers and they had to pay the price in terms of revenue and press.

In the end, This film is like all of Moore's films, somewhat true and moving, but mostly ignorant of the relevent hardcore facts of the situation. Moore is a master of what he does, however, nobody can deny that.

[–] vitaminI 20 years ago

Moore has become something of a liberal pundit in the years after Roger & Me, but he wasn't when he made this movie and I don't think that he was exactly trying to say anything specific about business, economics, politics, etc.

The movie is about a liberal who has become severely disenfranchised and angry at the insane logic of the world (and GM). I think that is basically all it is. It is really more of a statement of his angst and disillusionment rather than any argument about the flaws of capitalism, or anything like that.

It is not like his latter, semi-didactic films where he is trying to make certain points about America, or politics, or whatever. If it was, it would be pointless crap, but it’s not.

In the end, This film is like all of Moore's films, somewhat true and moving, but mostly ignorant of the relevent hardcore facts of the situation. Moore is a master of what he does, however, nobody can deny that.

Sure it is ‘mostly ignorant of the relevent hardcore facts of the situation’ to a degree, but you seem to be confusing today's Michael Moore with the Moore of fifteen years ago. Today he knows that his voice will be heard and because of this he attempts to change the political landscape to something closer to his own views. Today he tries to make concise arguments to support his views.

When he made Roger & Me he did not try to present any concise arguments because he wasn’t trying to make any arguments. When he was making this film, I don’t think that he even considered that someday people would seriously listen to his political views. He probably didn’t even expect anyone to see his film. Like any other new filmmaker, I’m sure, he likely had a lot of insecurities concerning how people would perceive his movie, and he didn’t want to lay it all out on the line. So he made it about his anger and kept most of his political ideas to himself.

[–] SERVOMOORE 20 years ago

A significant point of this film was that if you ruin many persons well being, that is going to ruin other businesses, and the ripple effect will spread across the nation, and eventually, even more GM employees are going to feel this. Especially considering how tens of thousands more and more employees have been laid off, their jobs sent to Mexico, and not just the blue collar type that you obviously perceive as being toe scum.
And the impact on crime rate
Suicide rate
and religous exploitation of the people.

In short, are you saying that because some persons weren't fired from a company that was making billions, but wanted to make more and buy out other companies, it's not a point to be made at.

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] frojavigdis 20 years ago

After having worked with the auto industry in Germany for three years, I can tell you that there are other ways to run an auto industry that *can* compete with Japan and other country's cost-saving advantages of dumping and other practices. German workers in the automotive industry, from development to assembly line, receive far more benefits than their U.S. counterparts, costing the company much more money but somehow "magically" providing a better product while still making good profit. GM set itself up for failure, as many American companies do, by looking at profit-making in the short-term and screwing over their workers while doing so.

Americans workers need to stand up for their rights and get better benefits so that we can slowly see a turnaround in both economics and in the quality of life for the middle class.