Michael Moore Calls Zero Dark Thirty a '21st Century Chick Flick'S

Controversial bon bon Michael Moore wrote a piece defending Kathryn Bigelow's Zero Dark Thirty in Time magazine (with a longer version on his Facebook page, naturally). It raises some interesting arguments, and not all are easy to agree with. But then, this is Michael Moore, what do you expect? I'd love to see him end a debate with "everyone's feelings are valid and useful!" Which, fair, lots of people are dumb jerks, and Moore is great at calling out hypocrites. Still, can you imagine dating this guy? You'd be all, "Let's go to dinner?" And he'd be all "But I want to have lunch." Insufferable! Also, his wife would probably be pretty pissed.

Moving on! The most interesting part of his whole defense rests in this small segment regarding women in film:

Oh – and girl. 'Zero Dark Thirty' – a movie made by a woman (Kathryn Bigelow), produced by a woman (Megan Ellison), distributed by a woman (Amy Pascal, the co-chairman of Sony Pictures), and starring a woman (Jessica Chastain) is really about how an agency of mostly men are dismissive of a woman who is on the right path to finding bin Laden. Yes, guys, this is a movie about how we don't listen to women, how hard it is for them to have their voice heard even in these enlightened times. You could say this is a 21st century chick flick – and it would do you well to see it.

I love a rom com more than I love some members of my family, but there's definitely more to "chick flicks" than Kate Hudson weeping into Matthew McConaughey's crotch. I'm not sure anyone involved with Zero Dark Thirty would see themselves as making a feminist statement by simply existing, but they are. Women can direct, star in, produce, and dp any type of movie — not just ones where Judy Greer plays the kooky best friend. It doesn't matter whether or not you like Bigelow's films, we should just be thankful she exists.

[via Indiewire]