Rating: 
Summary: The Gun Nuts Are Fuming
Review: This movie is not as anti-gun as the pro-gun groups claim it to be. MM expressed general agreement with the Second Amendment, and devoted enough time to gun owners in the U.S. and Canada to get their views on a variety of issues. He made the gun owners he interviewed look human - even Charlton Heston!Being scholarly isn't MM's forte, and he doesn't pretend to be a scholar in examining why America is such a violent country. He examined the issue the way he knows best - with a video camera and creative humor. Many would admit that he did a very good job. Whether you agreed with the points made in the movie or not, you have to admit that it got you talking. I lost a lot of my respect for Dick Clark after seeing him coldly reject MM. That went against his clean-cut American icon image. Clark could have at least offered a word of sympathy to the mother who made the long roundtrip to work for minimum wage at his namesake restaurant at the cost of not being able to see her son (who would take a gun to school and kill a fellow classmate). Instead, Clark lived down to his first name. BFC deserved its Oscar, and made a good bid for being the best documentary of all time. MM will be hard-pressed to top this in his forthcoming film about 9/11.
Rating: 
Summary: Not a documentary
Review: Documentary is my favorite type of film, and the fact that they comprise such a small segment of what gets made and released makes me want to see any one of them that comes along, even if the subject matter isn't something immediately appealing to me ("American Movie" for example, which I wasn't expecting much of but turned out to be great). I never thought much of Michael Moore before seeing this, but it was promoted as a documentary so I thought I'd try it out. IF YOU WANT TO SEE A DOCUMENTARY, DON'T BOTHER WITH "BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE". It is not a documentary. It is not even a "film". It's a "movie" of fictitious skits designed to make blinkered people in places like San Francisco and the Upper West Side of Manhattan feel good by treating their fantasies and lurid desires as if they were reality. Several of the reviewers on this site go into detail about how Michael Moore stages, alters, and distorts in this little "movie", so I won't be redundant. I'll just say that if you feel like seeing a factual presentation of a political event or issue, get "One Day in September", a TRUE documentary about probably the most relevant issue in America, today--terrorism.
Rating: 
Summary: Provocative Film by an Overzealous Filmmaker
Review: Michael Moore raises important questions about violence in America, and offers some provocative answers. Unfortunately, he is so clearly biased by his own political views, that his conclusions lack credibility, and ultimately the film degenerates into a political manifesto. The clearest indication of this is that those who share Moore's political views love the film, while those who don't hate it. At first, the film seems to be an intelligent investigation into the question of why gun violence is so widespread in the U.S. Using the tragedy of Columbine as a focal point, Moore explores the factors that might explain why, for example, the number of gun deaths is over 11,000 per year in the U.S., while being less than 100 in most other industrial nations. This is a striking statistic, and the viewer will be eager to learn more. But this is no Frontline investigation. The statistics and historical accounts are distorted, the interviews are staged to make some people look good and others look bad, and anecdotes are presented as generalized facts. In short, it soon becomes apparent that the filmmaker is far from objective and probably had his mind made up about the topic before starting the film. There is nothing wrong with making a film with a point of view. But then don't try to pass it off as a documentary. It's the blurring of the line between objective reporting and proselytizing that makes this film so insidious. Moore has a way of interviewing those he doesn't like or agree with that is obviously staged to make them look bad, and he uses this technique shamelessly. He peppers Charlton Heston and Dick Clark with questions that are really rude accusations, and then makes a big deal of the fact that they terminate the interview, as if somehow this is evidence of their guilt, rather than his rudeness. He gets away with it because it is entertaining to watch. At the same time, Moore practically coddles Marilyn Manson and others that support his point of view and can be seen effusively agreeing with them on camera. Bottom line: this is a film about an important topic that will make you think, and is worth seeing, as long as you keep in mind that it is not a documentary, but rather an opinion piece staged as a documentary.
Rating:
Summary: Clever 'movie', highly worth the watch.
Review: I'll be honest. I heard of 'Bowling for Columbine' before the Oscars, but never paid much notion. Until I heard Moore's Oscar speech on the radio. I was amazed that anyone would dare to speak out so sharply against the Bush administration on such an event. Sadly, though, the movie was unavailable to me for a long time... Amazon's English counterpart DOES have it for sale. (Region 2). The movie is built around the shootout at the Columbine high school, where two teenagers opened fire on their fellow students. Moore wonders what possessed these two, and makes it his mission to find out why the US shows such a ridiculously high number of murders when compared to other nations such as Canada, the UK, Germany, etc. He interviews various people, ranging from NRA's chief spokes goblin Charlton Heston, relatives of the kids who got killed, victims of the Columbine shootout, and bad-boy rocker Marilyn Manson (Who is named as one source of violence in kids). As the documentary proceeds, Moore weeds out a few of the often-named arguments of why anyone would go postal. Violent movies are also watched in other countries, Marilyn Manson is also listened to in other countries, Canadians own more guns-per-capita than the US, and not just the US has a violent history. The underlying conclusion as the movie proceeds seems to be that Americans are kept in control by fear; time after time, the US Government uses the media to strike fear into it's subject's hearts. This (according to the movie) leads to the 'Shoot first, ask questions later' mentality that could in turn explain why the number of killings in the US is as high as it is. A very striking moment (in my opinion) is when Moore takes two victims to K-mart's HQ, and kindly asks them to stop selling ammo for handguns. Initially, they seem to have hit a brick wall, but when they return the day after (with more press in their tracks than Michael Jackson usually gets), a statement is made that K-mart indeed will stop selling said ammo. Moore raises some very valid points, often combined with a great touch of humour, and we can only hope that enough people will go and watch this movie. If Moore succeeds in just making ONE person reconsider taking up their gun and using it to cause death and mayhem, THAT'S when the movie REALLY proved successful.
Rating:
Summary: An "Eye-Opener" for everybody!
Review: If you are one of those people who turn on the TV and BELIEVE everything you see/hear there because "they" said it on TV, then I suggest that you DEFENITELY watch this film! It's a real "Eye-opener". I "heard" that 75% of American people supported Mr. Bush's decisions when it came to Iraq war! If this number is correct, then I guess 75% of American people just believe what-ever they see/hear from American media! This is a shame and I hope that you watch this film and try to THINK yourself a bit before you just buy what-ever "they" sell!! Hereby I also like to thank Mr. Michael Moore for such a great film! I also love his attitude and personality. It seems like he is one of those few people who wants to make positive changes. Hope you enjoy the film as much as I did.
Rating:
Summary: Awesome
Review: You've just gotta see it to believe it. One of the best films by an American ever.
Rating:
Summary: Finally!
Review: My sincerest thanks to Michael Moore for bravely creating a movie that doesn't allow the viewer to walk in, sit down and just stare at the visions before them. This movie makes every viewer (republican, democrat, green - anyone) take a serious look at the things we put our energy into. This country is led by hate and greed and most important, fear. This movie should be a mandatory part of high school curriculum. Everyone should see this movie if for no other reason than to conduct a reality check. Thank you Michael Moore!
Rating:
Summary: Poor
Review: Muddled and spurious. Most irritating moment is the flash card run through of America's alleged misdemeanours abroad which were supposed to be accepted on some subliminal level rather than thought about. If you pose the question as to why there is such a high level of gun crime in the States then it might be worth your while looking at the convictions and drawing some conclusion as to the motivations behind them. At one point we are shown a quick collage of video recorded shootings for the purpose of illustrating the point that Americans kill each other rather than examining why. It's curious that Moore should lambast American imperialism while showing indifference to a foreign audience who may not be familiar with the background story behind the clips. Doesn't he care that we might like to know or does he think it's irrelevant because he merely wanted to point out that guns discharge bullets? I do recognise the clips, which have been aired in the UK in various documentaries. One was the highway guy who I think was shot by a police marksman. Less familiar was the man trying to shoot a women as she lay screaming on some grass and it was distressing to have been subjected to this while being kept in the dark about why this was happening. The footage of a man in police custody being shot in the head I recall as occuring at a courthouse where the man was about to go on trial for raping the assailant's child. The motivation of this crime would appear to be revenge then, rather than the catch-all 'fear' that Moore seemed to be pushing without question. What else would examining gun crime convictions reveal, if he had bothered? How many gun murders occur during robberies, for instance? The motivation could be unwillingness to work for a living, rather than fear. Moore questionably states that the poverty issue is the preserve of the left but wouldn't it be worthwhile talking to the criminals who actually commit crimes rather than scoring political points? Of course, prisons are full of innocent men, but some are honest about discussing their failings. Knocking on Canadian doors is less illuminating and statistically meaningless, too. I'm also minded of how television stations in Britain often cancel films that may offend those who have been the recent victims of an air disaster or child abduction, only to show them two weeks later. Likewise with the Heston interview. Is it any more morally acceptable for Heston to cancel his visits to Flint and others mentioned only to arrive at a later date when the victim's families may be less bereaved? Moore ducks this question. Why should Moore expect Heston to be held to account for the death of the little girl when Moore himself is a NRA member? Just because he wouldn't have been crass enough to show up at the meeting? One of the reasons often put forward in favour of having a gun in every home in the States is to prevent a totalitarian government from oppressing the people after a coup. The film doesn't examine this interesting point. After all, it beggers the question as to how, if a totalitarian administration would be unable to impose it's will on an armed American people, can a democratically elected government enforce the legitimate laws of the land now? Certainly there seems to be this very problem already with some of the Militias portrayed in the film. A better documentary still awaits on this subject matter.
Rating:
Summary: Eye-opener
Review: Michael Moore's recent feature was an eye-opener for me and
for just about all of the people I recommended this film to.
It wasn't so much about the facts (most of us Europeans have known for a long time that a good part of America consists of gun-loving cowboys (logical, given America's history) but rather
the good news that there are actually people out there, such as Mr Moore and others, that are starting to show the real picture of what that supposedly great country of freedom really looks like from the inside. Indeed, if you are white, male, and from a well-off family, you definitively have a much bigger chance of ever tasting that American freedom. If you're not, you're gonna have a much harder time and you very well may be flipping hamburgers for the rest of your life. But what the heck ! Smile, you're in America after all !
Rating:
Summary: Absolutely excellent, but preaches to the already converted
Review: I greatly enjoyed this film, his other films, and his books. Unfortunately I feel that those who most need to listen to what Moore has to say, and take a moment to stop and think about the current social/political situation in America, won't. Artists, journalists, filmmakers, etc. who can filter the truth from the utterly ridiculous American media are often preaching to the already converted. Generally it is people who already share what are considered more liberal views who read, listen, and watch such productions. Now don't get me wrong. I in no way think Moore should stop or even slow down his relentless persuit to be heard. The fact that he recently won an oscar in the most conceited superficial city in America seems to prove he is making incredible progress in getting his voice out. I can only hope that maybe, just maybe, a few minds will be changed by hearing what Moore has to say. He is certainly one of the most approachable and straightforward voices of reason in America today. I must commend him on his excellent work in Bowling for Columbine.
| 
