Bowling for columbine

Yes Mr. Moore may lean left, and yes he may not be the most objective documentarian.

However the facts stand: America has many, many more deaths attributed to guns than any other nation. It's a sad truth.

Unfortunately Mr. Moore has been vilified for asking why. And typical of the "head-stuck-in- the-sand" mentality of the far right, they are angry for his work, not at the facts.

This movie is well done and if you're left, right, in-between, gun nut, or responsible gun owner it is definitely worth viewing.

I suspect most of the negative comments posted about this movie at IMDB and similar sites are by people who haven't seen the movie. They're just angry at what they perceive the movie to be.

It isn't a movie about gun control. It's a movie that merely ask why so many deaths.

Enjoy.

On April 20, 1999 two students opened fire on their classmates at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado. It left 13 people dead and many more injured, gravely affecting the lives of those involved and stirring up a very loud gun control debate. In 2001, Michael Moore released Bowling for Columbine, a documentary that takes a look at gun violence in America and the things that make us the nation with, by far, the most gun related deaths per year. Moore examines the culture of America and just how we got this way through fear, paranoia, and vast over compensation to protect ourselves from something that isn't even there.

Michael Moore is obviously very liberal, and this comes through in almost everything he says or does. There is a lot of politics that go into his filmmaking, especially in this film that was released amidst the Bush administration. A lot of personal opinion goes into his filmmaking and he presents a very left wing point of view. Moore also employs plenty of theatrics and some overly dramatic moments in his film to get a point across. However, said point is incredibly important and it is laid out very clearly and very concisely throughout Bowling for Columbine.

Politics play a part in Moore's arguments, but they don't overshadow the basis of what he is trying to prove. In this film, he clearly outlines America's gun crazy culture fueled by paranoia, and if you just take a look around you will know that he has a point. Sure he finds the most ridiculous stories and the greatest examples to push his point, but in the broad generalization of what he is examining you can't say that he's wrong.

Interestingly enough, things haven't changed much in our culture in the eleven years this film has been out. America still thrives on fear, and we still fear the same things we did when this movie was made. It was incredibly interesting watching this film after the recent events in Aurora, Colorado because anything Moore says about Columbine can easily be related to our most recent tragedy. It proves that Moore has, rather unfortunately, made a timeless film that looks at an issue that seems to never go away, instead only getting worse. Moore tackles some disturbingly true topics about gun violence and fear, and he puts it all into his perspective very well in a very high quality documentary. Bowling for Columbine is an excellent film that people in America truly have to watch. Moore points out some sad but very prevalent truths in this film, and there is a lot to be learned from it.

First, Michael Moore is an extraordinary documentarian, making an adventure out of every topic he tackles, rather than a series of talking heads. Bowling for Columbine tackles gun violence in the U.S. with simple, open-ended question: Why the U.S.? What is it about the culture and history as well as access to guns of the United States that makes this country such a dangerous place to live with so many gun deaths compared to all other industrialized countries? His answer is not a simplistic one - it is not simply that we have a 2nd amendment and people misinterpret it as so many anti-gun folks might say. Canadians own about as many firearms and yet they don't have nearly the rate of gun-related deaths. Although many will view this film as anti-gun, I think the film is much more sophisticated than those who feel threatened even by the question "why" understand the film? Moore, in fact, does not come to any hard and fast conclusions, perhaps other than that we in the U.S. live in a culture of fear and there are historical conditions, including racial segregation and economic conditions that we as Americans have not come close to fully addressing. This documentary is a must-see for anyone concerned about the number of gun related deaths and injuries and even for those who believe the 2nd amendment protects a person's right to bear arms, but feels that no "right" is without some reasonable restrictions.

What has become of the United States? Is there any difference from the United States that was formed by Puritans and tried to escape from persecution under the British flag? Has there always been a different mentality for the American than that of any other nationality of individual? After September 11th Michael Moore the director and writer set out to make a documentary that addressed these and other embedded questions that are addressed everyday in our news media, school systems, homes, stores and street corners. Attempting to address all sides of the issues as a person of the media Moore used not only his own experiences, his connection to the NRA, but also other persons opinions that ranged from Charlton Hesston, the well known president of the NRA and famous actor, to the average American that was confronted with the violent acts that resulted from the accessibility of fire arms. This documentary took a new approach to the display of information. Not only was animation used to explain history, American's imbedded fear of their own neighbors, but it also used rock music ( gave a beat or a pulse to the film that progress from slow to fast as the intensity of the issues progressed), sarcasm, interviews, and casual conversations. Moore traveled the country to talk to all those that make up the spectrum of the American society, he traveled to the scenes of some of the more recent American tragedies, made impromptu stops in corporations such as Kmart (where the boys from Columbine bought the ammunition used in the shooting), and traveled to Canada to get an outside or foreign opinion. The idea was to move away from the documentary style of `talking heads'; he wanted a film that would not only touch a chord with the American people but one that would also be readily watched. This idea also made the documentary, that there was too much influence placed on the `words of the professional' or the ` findings of the expert'; that these findings and misleadings flooded the news at night to increase the amount of fear that the average American has as it looked for a scape-goat to blame. The information that Moor presented in his documentary did not technically follow a pre-described narrative, but followed more of a form where the audience was left areas to think and to breakdown the information. Elements of the circular narrative were the foundation of the film, where similar elements in opinions and the common American we continually addressed. Yet, the only problem that could be addressed is one of the ways in which Moore collected some of his data. Some might see a use of trickery or manipulation was used on his part to get the responses and such passion-filled opinions stated. While others would see the same information in the light that no instigation was needed, that people have these strong beliefs, opinions and are willing to talk about them but they lack the examples or understanding of the topic to take a well informed stand on one side or the other. Such a problem is not new in the world of documentaries when controversial data is presented to the public. Moore did a great job of presenting a delicate subject to the American people and was deserving of the Academy Award for the project.

As most of the world knows, in April 1999, two Columbine High School students, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, took guns to school and shot thirteen students and one teacher dead. How did they get the guns? What does bowling have to do with anything? Those looking for an in-depth look at the two shooters will be disappointed. Although Mr Moore does record that Harris and Klebold went bowling on the morning of the shooting and later takes two of the wounded students, now recovered, to buy bullets at Kmart, this is not really about Eric and Dylan. Rather, it is more of an examination of the "gun culture" of the USA. The National Rifle Association, in this film headed by Charlton Heston, has ensured that getting a gun and ammunition is as easy as filling a prescription. Moore notes that we are unique among countries in that our rate of gun shootings and killings far surpasses that of Canada, our nearest neighbor, and other Western civilizations. Some have blamed violent video games, some singers like Marilyn Manson (interviewed in this film as a favorite singer of Harris), still others that "family department" stores like Kmart and Walmart have the weapons and the ammo. Interestingly, Moore also takes a look at Work-to-Welfare programs like the one near his hometown of Flint, Michigan. A young single mother was forced to work at a casino, 90 minutes away, to satisfy the welfare requirements but still couldn't pay the bills. When she was forced to move in with an uncle and had to leave her six year old son in his care, the young lad found his uncle's gun and took it to class, only to shoot a fellow student dead. what a tragedy! In short, anyone wanting to talk about the Second Amendment and gun control would do well to begin with this film. Those seeking in- depth information on the Columbine shooting should look elsewhere.