Rating: 
Summary: NOT a documentary
Review: A serious documentary should express the film maker's opinion like this one does. This is the worst movie ever. Michael Moore should just move to his beloved Canada and not in the 2 million dollar apt at the Dakota where ironically John Lennon was killed by a GUN, and stop milking the city of Flint and America's problems. He is part of the problem he presents. He has shamelessly edited parts of the interviews to present his points of view. He simply does not present the truth, but only his personal opinions as if they were the truth, I found this "documentary" to be DISCUSTING and INSULTING TO ANYONE'S INTELLIGENCE.
Rating: 
Summary: Try to focus on the message, not the medium
Review: It is hard not to be partisan in reacting to this partisan movie. This is a movie in which the movie maker clearly has a mission and is not shy about admitting it -- to shock us into the acknowledging the frightful realities of gun ownership and lack of gun control, and disabuse us of fallacies which have been propagated by the gun lobby and their partisans. It may not be accurate to categorize Michael Moore's film as a documentary since he engineers much of the footage himself, generating much theater to make some of his points. For example, he convinces two teenage victims of a shooting who still have bullet fragments in their bodies to return them to Wal-Mart where the original ammunition was purchased. So admitting this as a blatantly partisan work, why should we think it has value? I believe it is in its unrelenting refusal to accept pat answers to the reasons underlying gun violence in the United States. Moore very ably takes to task gun advocate Charlton Heston's claims of ethnic diversity as the root of the problem of gun related violence, by pointing to the ethnic diversity of Canada where gun related violence is all but unknown. He actually takes his camera to check the front doors of several homes in a Canadian town to verify assertions by its residents that their homes are never locked. This kind of cinema verite is potent. He similarly does away with explanations based on a violent history or violent entertainment in the United States, pointing to examples of similar phenomena in Germany and Japan where the gun-related deaths are a miniscule fraction of the United States. This is not to say there are no factual errors or simplifications in the movie. But, whichever way you look at it, Moore makes it hard for anyone to not face up to the fact that the United States has little justifiable explanation for why its children face a multiple of the risk of gun-related violence compared to their peers elsewhere in the industrial world. It is a reminder of a troubling message and viewers should expect to feel some unease with this movie.
Rating:
Summary: cool
Review: about guns in america and how we love them. discusses many of the violence with guns such as columbine. toally cool video. the scene with charles heston is totally cool.
Rating:
Summary: An Interesting Mixed Bag...
Review: Like all of Michael Moore's films, Bowling For Columbine sharply divides opinions all over the nation (just look at the 5 star and 1 star reviews). You either loathe him or love him. I, being a fence sitter by nature, like some of his stuff and hate other stuff. The way I look at is this: if you honestly don't even consider the questions that his films bring up about our society, you are too conservative and if you don't question the information he gives, the editing of the interviews and clips or his "spin" on the facts you're too liberal. As far as the movie aspects of it go, Moore tries to keep interest going throughout the two hours plus, and is largely successful; but there are about about a billion different tangents that he digresses on throughout the film and it distracts from the overall thrust of the film (if you've seen it you know what I'm talking about). For instance, Moore goes into a video montage of various dictators that the US has supported over the past half century with no reference to any of the situations that accompanied each of them. Moore apparently thinks that all foreign policy is like a philosophy seminar, where there's a good choice and a bad choice and the choice is always clear cut. That's nice in theory, but in the real world its often between the bad guy and the really bad guy. There are several quetionable aspects to the movie, but I believe it also makes some great points that need to be addressed and it should be viewed. Watch it and decide for yourself.
Rating:
Summary: Documentary???!!!
Review: While this film might have some value if marketed as the op-ed piece it is, presenting it as a documentary is just as misleading as many of the bits of misinformation that the director presents as facts. Even during the filming of the piece Michael Moore misled some of the movie's participants, then showed their "opinions" out of context and contrary to their true feelings. There is plenty of this kind of deception on the networks, why bother renting/buying it when it's the same drivel you can get for free every evening?
Rating: 
Summary: A masterpiece!
Review: It's with work like this that the world would be a better place.
The truth shall set you free! The kind of truth the common man doesn't like to hear. Keep up the good work Michael!
Rating: 
Summary: Documentary NOT.
Review: I enjoyed this film. It was at times very funny. It is NOT a "documentary" however. Many of his figures are misleading.
The PLUS: Raises the question of the amount of fear that is generated in American society and the role the media plays in that hysteria. FEAR & CONSUMPTION.
The NEGATIVE: His conclusion that a society so fearful should not have guns. The kind of conclusion that plays right into the hands of a government nature that would exterminate us all."Gun Control" is the greatest untruth in the face of determination.
Rating:
Summary: A step down from Roger & Me, but still entertaining
Review: I finally got a chance to see this film at Cinemateque--this little out of the way place in Haeundae--and wasn't disappointed or impressed. It was a fairly even-handed documentary that played loose with some of the facts, but managed to maintain a constant voice throughout the entire film. Basically, Moore's asking all the right questions, but leaving the viewer(s) to provide the answers. In subsequent interviews with Moore, the comparison between America and Europe is given even more weight; everybody else in the world can take criticism and debate without condemnation on sight, so why can't America? The ending was a bit much; he was striving for 'the big payoff', but in some ways he managed to make you feel sympathy for Charlton Heston (pretty hard to do, actually), and that takes away from the impact of the film. Nevertheless, it's a documentary that should be shown to every high schooler in the world, not just North America.
Rating:
Summary: No Spin Zone?
Review: This film exposes many disturbing statistics like how more Americans kill each other with guns than any other country even though all the other countries watch the same violent movies, listen to the same violent music, have sometimes more violent histories and have the same amount of gun as America. So where is this hate coming from in the USA? Michael Moore says it's fear brought on by the people in power. I agree with this pretty much. George W. Bush did a wonderful job of scaring the living daylights out of Americans after September 11th. People lined up out of stores to buy guns and gas masks. He even scared the American people into a war with Iraq by making them believe they were out to get them and they had these weapons of mass destruction that they were ready to use at any moment. Americans are very persuasive people. Tell them to jump off a cliff and they just might do it. By the way, I am an American and I'm not bashing the USA. But I agree with Michael Moore and think there is a major problem in this country that we turn to guns and weapons and killing every time we get spooked. The interview with Charlton Heston is priceless. When he found out he had no answers for Michael's questions he just gets up and leaves the room like a coward. The problem I have with this film is Michael Moore seems to spin things a bit too much. When he was in Canada he tried to show how people there leave their doors unlocked. He went door to door to make us shocked that all the people left their doors open. The thing was, it was day time. Most people don't lock their doors unless they either leave their house or go to bed. I know my door is unlocked during the day when I'm home. So this isn't shocking when he walks up to a door and it's unlocked yet he wants us to believe it is. There are other facts Michael spins to lead people over to his side but an intelligent person can figure this out. Over all, I found Michael's film entertaining and interesting.
Rating: 
Summary: Lying at Bowling
Review: Although it is very entertaining and thought provoking, Michael Moore stretches the truth, deliberately misleads, and meanders in his so-called documentary. There are a couple of websites out there that expose some of the fictions that MM promotes. Personally, I don't see why he had to be so misleading. The concerns he discusses in the film are valid ones that need to be addressed by our government and society. In any case, the film is worth watching, but as any intelligent person should do, go out there, find the facts, read other opinions, and draw your own informed conclusions.
|
