Rating: 
Summary: A Sucker Is Born Every Minute
Review: The apparent success of this non-documentary propaganda film is one of the most compelling affirmations yet of P. T. Barnum's famous dictum, "a sucker is born every minute." If I had to devise a tag-line for "Bowling For Dollars" it would be "even fat, ugly, unshaven, talentless dropouts can make it in America."Don't waste your time or your money. This one ain't worth it.
Rating: 
Summary: Done in the Best Possible Humor, Documentary Masterpiece!
Review: The Littleton tragedy affected me deeply and I thank Michael Moore for exploring it in such a thoughtful way. This is a masterpiece of documentary film making! The multimedia features on the special edition DVD provide an extensive study guide designed for teachers and community activists.
Rating:
Summary: From the sick and twisted mind of Michael Moore
Review: I am not a gun owner, neither do I have strong personal feelings about the right to bear arms, but I know leftwing propaganda when I see it. That's the problem with so much of what liberals stand for today - they take such extreme positions in such a loud-mouthed way, they alienate most regular people. The war in Iraq is one huge example. Ordinary, patriotic Americans got so sick and tired of seeing the Martin Sheens and Susan Sarandons parading around and declaring their hatred for the Bush Administration, and the Dixie Chicks and Bruce Springsteens abusing their platform at music concerts to denounce President Bush when all that people wanted was for them to shut up and sing.
Michael Moore is another liberal idiot who has alienated much of mainstream America. Even many of his fellow liberal celebs were embarrassed at his little tirade at the Oscars, wanting him to shut up and hurry off the stage. Moore has a knack for distorting the truth, demeaning people and taking advantage of tragedy for his own despicable political agenda. Columbine is one example. There were parents of Columbine shooting victims who didn't want to speak to Moore, knowing his twisted motives. As the father of Rachel Scott said, "Guns didn't kill my daughter, people killed my daughter." With their motives, those two sick boys could have used any means to murder, maim and terrify.
A documentary would have been better spent analyzing the motives of children who want to kill their classmates. The easy access the Columbine killers had to firearms is scary for sure, and their parents should be held accountable. But to suggest guns are inherently evil and that "gun control" is the solution to America's bloodlust is missing the point. People were killing each other before guns were invented. There already are laws to control gun ownership. If the courts would do their job and honor the work the police do, we would be locking up many more illegal arms dealers, gangsters and drug dealers, thus making the average citizen feel safer and less inclined to buy a firearm for protection.
For the liberal sanctimony and falsehood presented in this "documentary," I loathe Michael Moore more than ever. For some truth about Moore, see the website http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html
Rating:
Summary: I guess no one is perfect....... Not even Michael Moore
Review: Obviously it won awards, obviously he is famous for his documentaries.... but I was shocked when I watched this. It logically collapsed upon itself. I started to watch it, and the longer it went the more upset I became, it jumped from idea to idea, and tied together no loose ends, and left more questions than answers. Now you might say, thats the point, but wrong, because the questions that your left with are, "what is he talking about?" "how does that follow from that?" there are so many inconsistencies, obvious editing tricks, and simple non-sequirtors in this film that even a 4th grader could see it was closer to fiction than the truth. Not only did this film dissapoint me, insult my intelligence, but it also made me not want to buy any other product that michael moore ever produces.... I dont think I will even watch the Oscars again, especially if they reward such mediocre work for documentary work.
Rating:
Summary: Columbine on my doorstep...
Review: I sobbed for 27 straight days after the Columbine massacre. I talked to my children, their friends, other parents, to strangers. I just wanted somebody to tell me how this could happen. Instead of simply beating his breast with the rest of us Michael Moore hit the road with the same relentless outrage that brought the human tragedies of Flint, Michigan to living rooms across the country in "Roger and Me." In "Bowling for Columbine" Moore takes a breathtakingly painful subject, of which Columbine is representative, and places it firmly in the center of the lens. One by one Moore sets up theories about violence in America and neatly knocks them down again. This is not a documentary for those who seek simple answers and handy villains. This is a study that charges into your psyche and rearranges notions about "conservative" and "liberal;" it rattles the foundation of what we perceive to be "American ideals;" and, at least in this viewers opinion, drops responsibility for the many tragedies represented by Columbine squarely in the vicinity of my own doorstep. I suspect that others will come away from this documentary, as I did, fundamentally altered in outlook. I wanted Moore to tell me who to point my finger at; I wanted him to tell me to point my finger at the people I had decided deserved it. In the end, the story he told had me looking for answers in my own heart and asking not "What do YOU need to do?" but "What must I do?" if our world is to change. In true Moore fashion the sacred cows take most of the arrows. Michael Moore is at his best when he is letting his subjects hang themselves, and in "Bowling for Columbine" there is no shortage of people willing to do this. The documentary gets awkward when Moore handles the rope. The Japanese have a wonderful word, "wabi." An object's wabi is the flaw that makes it unique and valuable. "Bowling for Columbine" has some "wabi" moments. Though deserving of the Oscar it received, it is not a perfect work. As a former journalist, I can understand how Moore fell into the trap of demonizing Charlton Heston simply because Heston was courteous enough to make himself available for demonization. That's unfortunate, because Heston isn't the issue - or even a good representative of the issue - and doesn't deserve the abundance of air time he was allotted. Moore ambushed an elderly and ailing man in his own home (for God's sake, this is MOSES we're talking about), attempting to pin Heston to the wall for events in which Moore well knows Heston was, at best, a bit player. Including Heston's actions and statements within the NRA is instructive; the relentless focus on Heston is a lightening rod, and puts in jeopardy the larger purpose. The "K-Mart" segment clearly demonstrates that somebody in that boardroom saw Roger and Me and realized there would have been no compelling hook if Roger had taken a half hour to talk to Moore. K-Mart made the right decision for all the right reasons and slid under the ropes before Moore had the gloves on tight. The anti-climax of the non-confrontation had Moore goofily giddy as he stumbled witlessly through a few shameless self-congratulatory minutes. Unfortunately for Heston, K-Mart's capitulation apparently left Moore without a high card. These awkward moments are the film's "wabi" - the flaws that make this work, and Moore as the master story-teller, human and personal. These moments are counterbalanced with brilliant editing, heartbreaking and heart-uplifting stories told by simple story tellers, a sometimes startling view of how we Americans perceive ourselves and how we are perceived by others, and a well-knit, well-presented story. Michael Moore is a master story-teller with a camera. His "everyman" demeanor is personal, unpolished and unerringly human. Those who know Michael Moore's reputation as an instigator and provocateur may have difficulty suspending judgment and giving this work the thoughtful viewing it deserves. Those who manage to do that will find their investment returned.
Rating:
Summary: Surprising!
Review: As a gun owner... I usually part ways with my more liberal friends on the issue of gun control. I was aware of the hype, that this film was a "gun-bashing" propaganda piece. HOWEVER... I found it to be an honest representation of the issues surrounding gun violence... and MORE IMPORTANTLY... it leaves the audience to draw it's own conclusions as to why we lead the world in murders by gun. The answer to all the MM-Bashing sites is here http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/wackoattacko/
Rating: 
Summary: Good movie but misleading
Review: I saw this movie without knowing what it was and thought it was very good. Only problem is the portrayed "facts" are really just opinions. Not all, but read at http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html and see what I mean.
Rating:
Summary: Unreliable
Review: The problem with Michael Moore is that he is agenda driven. His facts can't be relied upon. Although I'm an advocate of gun control, I wish Michael Moore would leave the subject alone. He does more to hurt our cause via name calling and sensationalizing.
Rating:
Summary: Bowling Over Republicans
Review: Americans have not seemed more politically polarized in my lifetime than now. It seems like all our current concerns have come to a boiling head. Over it all wafts the smoke of the World Trade Center. This shadow hasn't blanketed controversy. We stir it in with everything that made us mad before. Some interesting works result. Michael Moore's 2002 film *Bowling for Columbine* exemplifies the current mix of argument. Controversial in his own right, Moore examines modern American violence in a sort of cross-country adventure. And now his vision is available in a special edition DVD from MGM Home Entertainment. Shine the Ball MGM's release provides plenty of extra pieces to peruse. The transfer and sound brings justice to Moore's journey about the lack of justice. Special features include Moore criticizing Republicans for attacking former President Clinton instead of preventing the September 11th attacks. Viewers also get to hear people lower on the filmmaking ladder provide a commentary; Moore's interns mostly provide little stories like being locked inside Charlton Heston's estate. The case insert is your standard scene selection card. Strike Despite its titular reference to the 1999 Columbine High School tragedy, *Bowling for Columbine* is not about school shootings. And despite its byline, "Are we a nation of gun nuts or are we just nuts?", it's not about guns. Instead, Moore launches a methodical attack against corporate conceit and social inequity, which he repeatedly implies are the sources of violence in America. True, Moore discusses guns in detail at first. For example, he interviews a relative of Timothy McVeigh about guns, and he examines not only the Columbine tragedy, but another infamous incident in Michigan, when a preschool boy shot a preschool girl. But Moore's gun interviews lead into an analysis of Canada, a nation with plenty of private firearms but a fraction of the violence. His Columbine interviews lead to discussion of the major defense industries located right in Littleton, Colorado. And his visit to Michigan concludes with a memorable confrontation with Dick Clark, one of several celebrities who use "Welfare to Work" for menial labor-including the mother of the aforementioned boy. Moore's implied concern against corporations and conservative government continue with brief examinations of the September 11th terror attacks, America's own history of terrorism, and America's fear-instilling media. Moore breaks his theme only in the final five scenes, when he tacks on a dramatic but contradictory attack against guns. Rules of the Game *Bowling for Columbine* passes as a documentary. To me, a documentary is a visual research report. Documentaries provide information, but do not pass judgment and do not draw conclusions. The Vietnam War film *Hearts and Minds* exemplifies a great documentary. Throughout most of *BfC*, Moore implies his opinions. He's obviously critical of conservatives, but he simply gives them rope to hang themselves. But in the last 20 minutes of the film, Moore advances an explicit argument, a specific solution, and he passes out judgment like a cop passing out tickets on Memorial Day Weekend. These attributes convert Bowling for Columbine from an informative exposition to a persuasive-policy exposition, and the latter is not a documentary! Gutter Shot This doesn't spoil my enjoyment of *BfC*. Unfortunately, its ending does. After spending the film dealing in ambiguity and complexity, Moore suddenly decides that gun control is the answer after all. Besides contradicting much of his film, Moore's final Act befits tabloid journalism. Moore parades Columbine survivors to pressure K-Mart into banning handgun ammunition from their inventory. The group even buys as much ammunition as they can, ostensibly so nobody else can get it. Once K-mart caves in, Moore tells reporters he is doing his part to reduce gun violence. This K-Mart scene suggests that targeting guns will reduce violence, contradicting his own point that nations like Canada are heavily armed but experience relatively low death rates. It also explains why I couldn't buy ammunition when I was stationed in El Centro, CA. Kmart and Wal-Mart were the only game in town; I and every other police officer in the area had to scrounge for enough ammunition to properly train for our jobs. I don't know if banning ammunition from Kmart saved lives, but it sure interfered with civilian and federal law enforcement training. After this segment, Moore confronts NRA president Charlton Heston in the film's climax. At first, Moore seems reasonable. Then he attacks Heston's pride with increasingly inflammatory questions. Heston walks out after Moore indirectly insults him. Moore pursues Heston and, in perhaps the most tactless scene of the movie, goads the aging president with a picture of the preschool shooting victim. Finally, Moore concludes with an ominous implication of continued gun violence, playing right into the fear-based media he disparaged not an hour before. I'm sure it's exciting to see the hip young liberal chase the mean old Republicans away. Such emotional provocations doubtlessly sealed Moore's Oscar award. To me, the K-Mart and Heston confrontations inflated Moore's reputation, while contradicting his own film and punishing non-criminals. The shock value of his climax might make his movie memorable, but also dishonest. End Score Moore's ambiguity had me in the palm of his hand for most of the film. I'm pleased he built his film on interview and news clips, showing instead of lecturing. Most of the film works, and it works best when Moore puts institutions on the spot. But he lost his grip in the end, when he witnessed to the gun control choir. In doing so, Moore banks into the same gutter that traps most of America's post 9/11/01 media. He preaches a party-line and pushes others away. *Bowling for Columbine* often strikes. But it will ultimately split people who should be working together. That Moore should slip like this so late in an otherwise excellent film is too frustrating to articulate.
Rating:
Summary: It took my breath away
Review: An amazing movie. It shook me to the core. I had always known that past American governments had made wrong decisions, but this made my head buzz. Michael Moore is amazing, and I think this movie should have won Best Picture. (Loved the characterization of Canada!) I was vaguely aware of Kayla Rolland's murder (I remember reading about it on a plane to Mexico when I was eight) , but I had never known about the way those on welfare were treated in Michigan. Yes, some facts may have been left out, but it didn't damage the quality of the movie. I have re-evaluated my values. I want to be an activist (anti-gun, anti-war, anti-violence) when I grow up. Michael Moore has re-proven to the world that guns are big problems. I was not brainwashed or corrupted by this movie, you gun nuts who hate Michael Moore. This movie was great, and I don't care what maniacs think! This is my favorite movie. Hats off to Michael Moore!
Rachael
| 
