September 16th, 2003


Bowling for Columbine

After pouring my heart into a post and more-than-hinting that I would love to hear what others thing...
I have come to the conclusion that no one really gives a crap what I write as long as I say somthing witty or link to somthing amusing :P So, to please the crowds.. or perhaps to annoy you, depending on how much thought I put into this... here's what I thought of Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. I can't guarantee that it will be witty, but it has nothing to do with my personal life, so that, at least, should be refreshing.

A lot of peope were critical of this "documentary." They said that he didn't really make a serious documentary, and pissed people off for calling this film with his message a documentary. I don't care if it belongs in that category or not. It only really matters to others because people get nasty when it comes to competition. He was up for oscars. People get bitchy when it comes to winning things. Just go hang out at for a day and you'll see what I mean.
I rented it... without having read "Stupid White Men" or any of Moore's previous stuff. On the Daily Show, Jon Stewart said that he enjoyed it... and while I don't share all of Jon's political points of view, I respect his opinion enough to fall victim to media influences and rent "Bowling for Columbine."
A lot of people accused Moore of editing together political speeches, etc, to make his point. I didn't see any single shot edited together. Throughout the documentary, though, he constantly cut shots of violence and "fun trivia" into the film. Overall, I think it heightened the impact, but I thought it was kind of ironic. Moore does a lot of wacky things to get people to [i] react [/i].. such as visiting Chuck Heston at home, and taking two columbine victims to K-mart to try and do somthing about their selling of handgun bullets. (Which was confusing.. because first he sounded like he was going to take the kids to a K-mart and try to return the bullets embeded in their bodies.. but then they went to corporate HQ to try to get them to stop selling 9mm bullets... then K-Mart ignored them.. -..-*... but in the end, K-mart agreed to stop selling bullets for firearms completely. Yay!)
In any case.. I agreed with some of his points.. but not all of them...
Anyway.. back to the reaction thing. He does all of these radical things to illicit [i]reactions[/i] from the people he is interacting with.. and from the audience watching the film.. but he tries to make a point (through his time in Canada) that part of the problem with people is that they react too much. It's like shock rock. They do it to make people go "Like, OMG!", but in the end, it's kind of stupid.
He also kind of ignored certain things to proove his point. I never said this documentary was unbiased XP But... He mentioned the UK and Australia a LOT in low gun-related death rates, and then zoomed in on Canada. He didn't go into depth about the gun control laws in the UK or in Austrailia, which.. unless you know what's going on over there.. makes them seem like fairytale lands where everyone can carry around guns, but don't really like the thought of shooting each other. The fact is.. the gun control laws over there are very different. Last time I checked, there was a gun ban in the UK, and there is a similarly strict gun control system in Australia, if I remember correctly.(And I may be wrong)
In any case... Canada most suited his argument, so he used that.... and that's probably what bothered me the most about the whole film. Though.. some of the interviews he snagged from people that live in Canada were really interesting.
I don't know. That documentary made me sad..... I think it does more harm than good to his point, b/c he looked like a damned fool throughout nearly the entire thing.
Some of his points were good.. but if you look bad while making them, it's hard to get respect... and he should know from the points he was trying to make.. it's important to look good, too. I mean... A lot of the people in Canada were saying that they thought that it seemed like no one in the US stopped to [i]think[/i] about things. A lot of the things that Moore does to try and proove his point seem brash and irrational.
Personally, I think the documentary would have been better if he'd let the Canadians make it :P They seemed to know more about us anyway... or at least have well-formulated thoughts and opinions on things. I don't doubt that Moore has well-formulated opinions.. but it's all in the presentation. I mean... Let's hit it home for the cosplayers, since that's what many of you do. The truth is... it doesn't matter how good the quality of the craftsmanship is if the chick wearing the costume is sexy, right? Or how about this... two different people wear the same costume. People will warm up to the person with the better presentation, even if the costume is exactly the same. That's why image is important. If you look like a damned fool stumbling around trying to make people squirm.... well.. some people get a kick out of that... but no one else is going to want to take you seriously.

Oh yeah.. and the other thing that pissed me off. How many people thing that montages of violence set to Louis Armstrong's "It's a wonderful world" is the most creative fucking thing they've ever seen? They did that for, what? Um.. Good Morning Viet Nam... or another movie like that...Big hollywood movie. No one's going to think of that as a creative way to make your point about violence. It was so disgustingly trite that I almost wanted to stop watching it then and there.
Ugh... I'm glad I stayed to the end just to say I finished it....
I wouldn't claim it's a wonderful work of art... but I also wouldn't claim that it's completely devoid of value.
There ARE a few things to think about in there... which is all Moore really wanted to do, I suppose. Piss people off and get them to think. Maybe he's decided to be ungodly annoying just to make you not like him enough to think for yourself. Afterall.. if you liked him too much, I suppose it would just be like a presidential election. Everyone competes to see how likable they can be, and no one really bothers with making a point b/c they want to be liked by more people for the sake of being liked& elected.. not for the sake of actually standing for somthing meaningful.
I always used to say... they'd NEVER elect me as president. I speak my mind too much.
Want to know what I think about abortion? Pro Choice. Wanna know why? Didn't think so. You'd rather make up your own reason and demonize me. I don't care, that's how I feel. Oh well. Just lost 300000000+ votes.
I'd never be president :P

Edit: On second thought, nevermind. I already know no one is going to read this because it's too damned long to take a shit to. That's why magazines do so well. the articles are short enough to shit to, and I forgot to add humor today.
  • Current Mood
    bitchy bitchy