"Wire" star will play the god Heimdall in Marvel pic.
Moore Celebrates Anti-Capitalism Movie ... at Ritzy Penthouse
A funny thing happened last night in New York.
Michael Moore’s latest movie, “Capitalism: A Love Story,” had its premiere at Lincoln Center. By most accounts, the film -- like “Bowling for Columbine” and “Fahrenheit 911” -- is destined to be another firestarter.
At the screening, Moore reiterated some of the things he said last week in Toronto, including his assertion that newspapers are essentially “slitting their own throats.”
As Michael Corkery, a blogger at the Wall Street Journal, noted, filmgoers picked up their tickets at “Bank of New York Box Office,” milled around the “Morgan Stanley Lobby” with glasses of champagne, and took their seats in the “Citi Balcony” -- a scenario that was a bit problematic, considering the point of Moore’s documentary.
But he should’ve seen the after-party.
The event, hosted by Esquire, doubled as the launch of the magazine’s “Ultimate Bachelor Pad,” a fully tricked-out, 11-room, nine-bathroom, 9,200-square-foot signature penthouse in SoHo, filled with flatscreens, sleek, modern furniture and luxury brands -- each room meticulously designed around an advertisers’ theme. (The Hugo Boss bedroom! The Heineken lounge! The Lufthansa kitchen!)
As Esquire publisher Kevin O’Malley explains in the Esquire SoHo brochure, part of the reason that the magazine does this every year -- alternating between New York and L.A. -- is to meet its “advertisers’ growing need to create relevant and innovative new consumer touchpoints for their brands. Our affluent readers share a range of passions: a real desire for the best-of-class products and services that our advertisers represent.”
In other words, the pinnacle of capitalism. A fantasy in capital excess. A byproduct of the corporate greed Moore rails against in the film.
By the time Moore arrived, the party was in full swing, with revelers enjoying the 360-degree views of Lower Manhattan on the 3,000-square-foot terrace, top-shelf themed bars, sipping signature cocktails (there was a guy hired to blow dry ice on one pomegranate-and-melon-martini thing) and devouring skewers of filet mignon.
Esquire even hired models to strip down and slip into the obligatory hot tub.
Moore (pictured at left with Esquire publisher Kevin O'Malley; photo by Marian Curtis) sans baseball cap, held court in the living room, sitting on a couch underneath LG’s 55-inch LH90 LED Mega Contrast flatscreen, his feet resting on cowhide carpet, picking at tomato-crusted flatbread on the bronze-sculpted coffee table.
“Can’t help but find this party … off-message,” Mediaite’s Rachel Sklar noted on Twitter. “Mind a little blown.”
“Yeah, this is ridiculous,” said one of the film’s staffers, sipping a cucumber-and-Cuervo margarita. Yes, kind of like the view.
To be fair, the other part of idea for these themed bachelor pads is to raise money for charity. Now in its seventh iteration, Esquire says it has raised over $7 million for various charities through hosting benefits on behalf of non-profits like Save the Children. (Which is awesome, although it seems like driving a Hummer to a Sierra Club meeting -- a quick and easy way to justify the absurd excess of the surroundings.)
But the juxtaposition of Moore celebrating his anti-capitalism film in a product-pimped penthouse was like a scene out of one of Moore’s films. Completely hypocritical. Totally disingenuous. A classic “gotcha!” moment.
It’s not the only ammo for Moore’s detractors. According to the Los Angeles Times, “Capitalism” is being co-financed by John Malone, “master of the tax-free deal, a champion of unfettered free markets, completely disdains government and most federal regulations and has expressed a fondness for Rush Limbaugh” who was recently “slapped with a $1.4-million fine by the Justice Department for illegal stock purchases.”
It seems that Moore is able to separate the marketing with the message.
A love story indeed.
(Photographs supplied by Esquire.)
Comments
Edward Arroyo Says
Wow. Just when I thought THE WRAP had some integrity in its journalistic perspective I read you.
Your article reminds me of a six year old girl I used to know who would tattletale constantly for lack of any thing better to say.
So much of news has been shifted to the "gotcha" sort of reporting that there's no real substance behind what's being reported. Like yours.
Moore is right about how corporate takeovers of newspapers have forced "the bottom line" to be purely profit motivated.
But, you know what, many journalists have shut up, and evolved into what those suits demand: pure gossip. It's no surprise that "journalists" have lost the respect of readers. When you give up your integrity you lose your credibility. And when you lose that, you have no value.
And its no wonder bloggers have become a viable alternative - they're no different than how many journalist are now becoming. Journalists are now "de-volving" to compete (ironically) with amateurs. Instead of investigating subjects with substance, many journalists are desperately searching for petty news.
Bottom line: jounalists are afraid of losing their jobs so they take up doing sophomoric journalism. Like yours.
Don't you think for a moment that Esquire loved the idea of including Moore as part of this hosted event precisely because of how it would be perceived? And, based on that,
who do you think it would benefit?
Now, I don't agree with Moore on everything he does. But, for him, the mission is to be heard. Create a dialog. Get it out there from behind the curtains - cuz, you can't depend on journalists to do it anymore. They're distracted by their own survival and are mostly compelled to look for "dirty" stuff. I hope we all aren't becoming bottom feeders.
As for you? The WRAP has lost one more reader. I wonder what THE WRAP's half-life will be.
Are you making a profit yet? No wonder.
Whatever Dude Says
Like all of Moore's films, "Capitalism" is a personal polemic, rife with misrepresentation, falsehoods, distortions and flagrant ignorance. For starters, that 90% stat is meaningless since he attempts to suggest that this helped finance all kinds of public works projects we can't afford today. The truth is that the current system, though nobody is taxed at 90%, is far more progressive and brings in more overall revenue per capita than at any other time in our history. The problem is that we spend too much and continue to incur to much debt - of which both the last administration and the current administration are guilty. Moore also doesn't seem to understand what Capitalism is. He never gets the definition right. And his suggestion that we replace it with "Democracy" is ludicrous. The two are not mutually exclusive - one is an economic system, the other a political concept. You'd think that with Moore's access, he could also secure one or two actual economists to speak in a movie that's ostensibly about economics. But his economics expert? Wallace Shawn! Really? Bottom line, Moore's argument is ignorant and unpersuasive and will serve only to bolster his street cred with the far left. He's like Limbaugh and Coulter on the right - he throws red meat to the crowd in hopes that his side can eventually pummel the other side into submission. He's not interested in finding constructive solutions. If he were, he'd educate himself on history and economics instead of inventing a false reality that conforms to his personal views.
Chris Dorr Says
This is a completely ridiculous article. Who cares where the party is held. All that matters is the content of the film. Write about something important and leave this trite stuff to someone else.
Maybe you should be spending your time matching the right decor, food and location for the premiere of every Hollywood movie. Let me guess, you already have started an event business to make sure everyone makes the right fit. After all, intelligent journalism is clearly not your forte.
Michael Heister Says
It is entirely too easy to confuse the trappings with the message.
Moore's film - which I saw last night - is not a screed designed to browbeat us all into a life of mendicancy, but rather a very insightful and funny expose of extreme corporate excess, particularly in the financial sector.
Moore points out that the rich were quite able to live like the rich back in the day, even though they were in the 90% percent tax bracket. In other words, the party you're so quick to make fun of could just easily have happened in the days of yore longs for.
He points out the seminal union-organizing event that turned the tide in favor of unionism in the United States and led to the ascendancy of the middle class - the class most besieged in the current class war. You know, the one Warren Buffet has said that we're in, and the rich are winning, even though they shouldn't be.
Moore also highlights positive examples - companies and coops putting into practice the ideals of democracy and in the process gaining a better lifestyle for their employees.
In short, making fun of a somewhat lavish - you've seen better, and you know it - shindig celebrating Moore's new movie is not only a cheap shot, but ill-considered.
Grant Devereaux Says
The reason journalism has lost its hard edge is that coprorations figured out if they buy the networks and pay journalists huge salaries they can win them over to their point of view. It has been pretty effective. When Barbara Walters laments that the Hiltons are not really rich, you begin to understand how detached celebrity journalists are form the lives from average Americans.
It is not surprising that big money is trying to sidetrack Michael Moore with pimped out penthouses. What is worth noting is Moore, as of yet - has not sold out. His movies deliver powerful attacks at the elites who try to enslave most of the rest of us. He is a still a hero.
NEW COMMENT