Watch Where to Invade Next For Free

Sadly Over-hyped

Highly Overrated But Still Good

Don't Believe the Hype

If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

Their were a lot of very interesting point brought to light in the this film. I would hope people would be more opened mined and observant of what works and don't work in society. Great film and very informative, I hope the messages and the information someday lead to a debate to a better way of tackling social and world problems..

To take this movie seriously, one has to accept its premise: that other countries, especially European countries, have anything to offer to the United States that's worth learning and adopting. That premise is hard to accept or defend. If anything, the rest of the world relies on the United States to solve problems, not the other way around. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, which occurred four and half decades after Europe ceased being the center of world power, the United States emerged as THE dominant country on the planet. That fact the movie omits. That omission seriously erodes the movie's credibility as a serious social commentary. Instead, Moore seems to revel in his dual role of American tourist/amateur cultural anthropologist. His admiration and interest in other cultures seem superficial and entirely staged, which is not surprising since the movie is not an academic project but rather a commercial product meant for an American audience and meant to promote a political agenda. This movie is another example of a movie maker using entertainment to make a political point. The formula certainly is not a new one. Whether it works in this case is up to the audience to decide.

This review will contain spoilers!Where to invade next is directed by and starring Michael Moore who is back with another U.S. critical documentary. While this time comparing European countries, pointing out their strengths and comparing them to his homeland's weaknesses. Even though this film is labeled as a documentary, I'm ready to disagree with this claim. Throughout the film Moore gives a deceptive view of both USA and European countries. By describing USA as an ignorant, cruel and horrible country in chaos and at the same time glorying Europe with false statements the viewer of the movie will be confused and get the wrong picture of how the situation is in the world. The first country Michael Moore decides to visit is Italy, a place where the working conditions are marvelous, with a minimum of 2 hours' lunch, 8 week paid vacation a year and happy workers as far as you can see. But is this really the reality? The answer is obviously no. The truth is Italians are entitled to a maximum of 20 paid vacation days + 10 paid holidays (http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/06/08/countries- most-vacation-days/2400193/), which in total adds up to 31 days, or 6 weeks. Even though 6 weeks is a relatively long time as paid vacation, Moore still chooses to exaggerate which gives a false impression of the working conditions. He also visits France, where a clip of a school chef claims he has never tasted a hamburger, and the kids at school are afraid of Coca- Cola, despite the fact that France has the second highest profitability for McDonalds in the world, besides USA. (http://www.dn.se/ekonomi/snabbmatskedjan-mcdonalds-inte-valkommen- i-Paris-matmekka/)He also visits Tunisia, where he praises the gender equality. He reminds us that the government funds woman-clinics and abortion, but not so surprisingly forgets to mention that the country is in 126th place on World Economic Forum's gender gap list. They also include a clip where a former leader of the government explain that the government can't force a woman to wear head coverings, which sounds great, until he continues with explaining that instead he himself is the one to tell his wife to do that. It's ironic that Moore decides to even bring gender equality up, since it's more of an issue than something to brag about in Tunisia. If he wanted to feature a country in Europe who has achieved more gender equality, he could have chosen Iceland, Norway or Finland, who are the top three most gender equal countries. To summarize, this film is highly biased and only created to make USA look bad in in comparison to Europe. Michael Moore uses false information to fool the viewers and throughout the movie he disparages USA as a country. The idea of a film who compares different countries is great but the way the director chooses to edit and give information is wrong in all ways. I would definitely not recommend this movie due to its lack of credibility. If I were to rate the movie it would get a 4 out of 10. The film deserves 4 stars because of the good sense of humour it contains and the way the movie was produced.

This is a review of the documentary ''Where to Invade Next'' (2015), by Michael Moore. This review will contain spoilers. In the documentary Moore ''invades'' some different countries in Europe. Here he shows things those countries has successfully brought in to their society, things he believe the U.S needs to improve in. He asks people how and why they are doing it this way, then he ''conquer'' these ideas and brings them back to America. In the end he reveal that all these ideas are from the beginning from USA and the European countries has just borrowed them from the U.S. The arguments that Michael Moore presents is according to me biased. He only shows the positive sides of the European countries and also leave out important information, not all that he says is true. Everyone hasn't 8 weeks of paid vacation in Italy and not all schools in France has great food, but this things strengthens Moore 's arguments and that's why he puts them in the film anyway. Of course he wants to deliver a message to the audience, he believe that the United States have some issues they need to work with and for all I know he might be right. But for me, the problem in this movie isn't whether or not he is right, but how he convince the audience of it. It is in my opinion not right to present a misleading picture of both the European countries and of the U.S. The people needs to have an honest chance to choose what to believe and then they must know the truth. To summarize, I think that this documentary is biased and Michael Moore isn't showing the whole truth. If you want to see this documentary you need to be critical to Moore's arguments. This isn't a documentary, it is propaganda. I wouldn't recommend this movie because it can give you a wrong and misleading picture of the world.