Bowling for Columbine
Jan. 14th, 2003 01:53 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
bop_radarI had heard a lot of rave reports of this full-length documentary film before I saw it, and was therefore interested but wary – so often films that get talked up a lot are a let-down. However, having sobbed and laughed my way through Michael Moore’s two-hour analysis of why America has far more gun-related killings per year than almost any other Western nation (11,000+ in comparison to UK 300+ or Australia (165)), I can say that this film deserves every bit of praise – including the thirteen-minute standing ovation at Cannes – that it receives.
‘Bowling for Columbine’ contains some remarkable footage of interviewees that range from the gun-totin’, gun-lovin’ head of the NRA, Charlton Heston, to Marilyn Manson, who came under scrutiny after the Columbine massacre as the perpetrators listened to his music. As Michael Moore points out, you might as well blame bowling for inciting them to violence: after all that’s apparently what the kids did the morning of the shooting.
Moore points the finger instead at America’s culture of fear (he interviews Glassner) and he demonstrates the effect of media-incited ‘scares’ on the populace. Americans are told on a daily basis that they should live in fear of almost anyone: their neighbours, their kids (after Columbine), and, most especially, black people. Of course so many of them think they need guns! Indeed, as Moore points out, it doesn’t seem to matter what the threat is these days: Americans are conditioned to be afraid. Moore includes a clip of Bush at a press conference announcing a ‘state of alert’ due to a ‘blanket threat’ that ‘has happened in the past and could occur again’ (no details given). And, delightfully, humorously, Moore reminds us of that ‘killer bee’ scare –remember them? Those ‘Africanised’ bees, so much more aggressive than the already-resident European bees, who, it was said, were preparing to sweep the country? They never came.
I found Moore’s comparison of America and Canada (both countries where guns and ammunition are readily accessible) fascinating, as it de-bunks the argument that America has more shootings simply because of the accessibility of guns. He argues that Canadians are a) not bombarded with fear-propaganda to the same degree, b) do not have the same levels of poverty and welfare-deprived low-income families, and c) are not taught that aggression (especially destructive, homicidal aggression) is the way to deal with threats or fear.
The same day as the Columbine massacre, the US dropped more bombs on Kosovo then on any other day during that war. In his interview, Marilyn Manson asks the question: ‘Who has the more influence in this country? I’d like to say it was me, but I’m going to go with the president.’ And the president is such a good role model!
The answer to the question Moore poses with ‘Bowling for Columbine’ is not a simple one. And he doesn’t provide a simple answer. But he does unearth some startling information that portrays the ‘hidden’ side of these issues – not discussed in mainstream media. Neither does he sentimentalise the victims of gun-related crimes, but he does facilitate two Columbine survivors taking action in a moving way.
This is a confrontational documentary that demands that audience members formulate their own opinions about this issue. I say to anyone who reads this: SEE THIS MOVIE! Especially if you are American, please, please, SEE THIS MOVIE! You don’t need to agree with Moore (there are plenty of gun-nutters who get to spout their views in this flick) but I think you do need to know the information he unearths and the arguments he puts forward.
See this movie!
‘Bowling for Columbine’ contains some remarkable footage of interviewees that range from the gun-totin’, gun-lovin’ head of the NRA, Charlton Heston, to Marilyn Manson, who came under scrutiny after the Columbine massacre as the perpetrators listened to his music. As Michael Moore points out, you might as well blame bowling for inciting them to violence: after all that’s apparently what the kids did the morning of the shooting.
Moore points the finger instead at America’s culture of fear (he interviews Glassner) and he demonstrates the effect of media-incited ‘scares’ on the populace. Americans are told on a daily basis that they should live in fear of almost anyone: their neighbours, their kids (after Columbine), and, most especially, black people. Of course so many of them think they need guns! Indeed, as Moore points out, it doesn’t seem to matter what the threat is these days: Americans are conditioned to be afraid. Moore includes a clip of Bush at a press conference announcing a ‘state of alert’ due to a ‘blanket threat’ that ‘has happened in the past and could occur again’ (no details given). And, delightfully, humorously, Moore reminds us of that ‘killer bee’ scare –remember them? Those ‘Africanised’ bees, so much more aggressive than the already-resident European bees, who, it was said, were preparing to sweep the country? They never came.
I found Moore’s comparison of America and Canada (both countries where guns and ammunition are readily accessible) fascinating, as it de-bunks the argument that America has more shootings simply because of the accessibility of guns. He argues that Canadians are a) not bombarded with fear-propaganda to the same degree, b) do not have the same levels of poverty and welfare-deprived low-income families, and c) are not taught that aggression (especially destructive, homicidal aggression) is the way to deal with threats or fear.
The same day as the Columbine massacre, the US dropped more bombs on Kosovo then on any other day during that war. In his interview, Marilyn Manson asks the question: ‘Who has the more influence in this country? I’d like to say it was me, but I’m going to go with the president.’ And the president is such a good role model!
The answer to the question Moore poses with ‘Bowling for Columbine’ is not a simple one. And he doesn’t provide a simple answer. But he does unearth some startling information that portrays the ‘hidden’ side of these issues – not discussed in mainstream media. Neither does he sentimentalise the victims of gun-related crimes, but he does facilitate two Columbine survivors taking action in a moving way.
This is a confrontational documentary that demands that audience members formulate their own opinions about this issue. I say to anyone who reads this: SEE THIS MOVIE! Especially if you are American, please, please, SEE THIS MOVIE! You don’t need to agree with Moore (there are plenty of gun-nutters who get to spout their views in this flick) but I think you do need to know the information he unearths and the arguments he puts forward.
See this movie!
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Re: Hello!
Date: 2003-01-15 07:28 am (UTC)Re: Hello!
Date: 2003-01-15 04:39 pm (UTC)When Andy first got his, I thought 'OK - I can exorcise the ghost of boyfriend past by reconciling myself with his new hobby.' Kinda didn't work.