What's most striking about "Sicko" is how composed, even serene it is compared with Michael Moore's previous acts of cinematic insurgency. The puckish ferocity and combative mischief that marked such previous Moore polemics from 1989's "Roger and Me" to 2004's "Fahrenheit 9/11" is on relatively low boil in this one -- at least until the climax where he takes a bunch of chronically ill Americans on a boat to Cuba for some accessible pharmaceuticals and treatment.
You may have already heard that he's probably in a little hot water for that.
But overall, the net effect of "Sicko's" penetrating and devastating inquiry into the way America takes care of its ill and dying is to transfer the anger to the audience rather than have Moore's own outrage spread all over his film. Which makes this movie, by a considerable distance, the writer-director's most effective provocation yet.
(snip)
Over-the-top? Not when one considers the recent story of someone who died in an emergency room while waiting for someone to help. That's not in "Sicko." But only because Moore didn't get to it before he finished the movie. It sounds as though there's going to be plenty of material for a sequel.
http://www.newsday.com/entertainment/movies/ny-etsicko0620,0,1950216.story?coll=ny-main-bigpix