Rating: 
Summary: Bad Research Poses as Fact
Review: I lived and worked in Japan for nearly a decade. Japan has gun control, but that does not deter the Japanese from murder with more imaginative weapons, the fruit knife being their weapon of choice. I read the news on a daily basis while I was in Japan, and was frankly astounded at the number of murders that occured in such a "peaceful" society. At least once a week a freshly cut up body would be found in trashbags in a coin locker at one of the many Tokyo train stations - in addition there are dozens of murders on a weekly basis due to poisonings, arson, samurai swords (more than one victim has been beheaded), cars as weapons, and of course, the ubiquitous fruit knife murders, as well as mass poisoning scares by serial killers such as "the man with a thousand faces". Not to mention the high pedophile rate, and vastly underreported number of rapes in that country, as well as domestic abuse that never gets talked about because of the Asian necessity of "saving face". The way the Japanese police tally the murder rate simply confuses the issue - I read of three different murders there that the police classified as "suicides". In one case, an Iranian man was found with his thoat slit ear to ear; in another, a Chinese woman's death was explained in this fashion "She stabbed herself and threw herself out the window." In another case, a Japanese man was found tied up in the trunk of a burned out car. All dubbed suicides by the Japanese police. In light of this, one fact does stand out about Japan that the NRA has been harping about for decades - that is "If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns." Well, it's true. Only the Japanese Mafia (Yakuza) and the police have access to guns. And the Mafia has committed more than one drive-by on the local populace, even going so far as to have a shoot out on one of the high-speed (and maybe appropriately named) "bullet" trains. What's my point? Don't trust statistics coming out of Japan. Or Asia for that matter. Saving face is their number one priority. Is America really that violent a country? I have been to over 50 countries, and I know better. For example, when Hindus and Muslims riot in India, they don't have access to guns. They do have access to swords and gasoline, however, and do a bang up job of chopping off as many of the oppositions' heads as they see fit. Not to mention setting entire trainloads of their "enemies" on fire, and to top it off, gang raping women in the "enemy" camp while the kiddies watch. These Hindu-Muslim spectacles, which seem to take place on an annual basis in India, never become more than a blip on the radar screen there, and certainly don't get much notice in the world press. Oh, by the way, did I mention? India has gun control. Can you imagine what would have happened if say, the black Los Angeles rioters had gone down the streets of LA, lopping off the head of any "whitey" who was unfortunate enough to get in their path? What might have happened? Well, it would have made the cover of just about every newspaper and magazine in the world. The hand wringing and the searching for answers would be a tv subject for weeks to come. And the people in the rest of the globe would have shaken their heads, calling us a violent nation. In India, a day like that is just another normal day in the neighborhood. What's my point? Well, if you look at how life REALLY is in these other countries, you'll find that the US comes out near the top of the list in terms of safety. Does that have anything to do with gun ownership? That is entirely debatable. The US is not a perfect country. However, it certainly does not deserve the "violent" moniker that Moore wants to paint it with. The extremely simplistic and asinine "History of the US" cartoon in this movie is a major dissapointment - I though Moore was brighter than that, but apparently not. The cartoon ends with whitey moving to the suburbs and arming himself to the teeth - while supplying black inner city youth with weapons (because they steal them from whitey). Does this make a whole lot of sense? Am I not supposed to be afraid of black youths who will break into my home to steal weapons? Are they really just victims of this "racist" system? Is it true that Oprah does not have single black neighbor for miles? I ask the last question because Ms. Winfrey was in great praise of this movie, and particularly the above mentioned cartoon.
When she moves out of the suburbs and into downtown Detroit, or Oakland, or Newark, I'll stop calling her a hypocrite. While I agree with Michael Moore's stand against the WTO, and big business, I feel he is way off the mark in this case. Just ask the organization "Jews for the Protection of Firearms Ownership". They know. Six million of them suffered and died due to being unable to defend themselves. Why? Hitler instituted gun control just before his famous act of genocide. Moore makes a point, but he makes it in a bad way, with an argument so full of holes that you can drive a Mac truck through some of them. While he is basically right about one issue, and that is that the media harps on trauma cases until people are afraid to leave their homes, his argument against guns becomes unglued when he states that the murder rate has actually gone down. Well, that's not due to gun control now, is it?
Rating: 
Summary: Reinventing the wheel?
Review: "Bowling for Columbine" is only as enlightening as the viewer is unenlightened. I suppose that might be true for most films, but especially here; independent filmmaker Michael Moore isn't telling me anything I didn't already know about guns, fear and violence in America. The film is a handy, humorous summation of the sad truth, but it lacks the ability to outrage and uncover like Moore's "Roger & Me" did in the 1980s.
Moore, who is a little too "unassuming" for my taste, especially when he conducts cheap, calculated interviews, does do one thing very well: He captures what it is to live amongst violent elements in America. He visits a gun survivalist training camp, where he finds middle class men firing semi-automatic weapons because, maybe, they can. He interviews high school dropouts who built bombs out of boredom. He goes to Canada and discovers that people just aren't as afraid up there. And he skewers the news media, especially local television stations, which amp up everyone's fear of violence nationwide through bleeding, leading stories even though crime stats show that many crimes have been reduced in the last decade. Moore also tries to cobble some kind of real argument against the NRA without using the gun availability argument -- Moore believes it isn't the problem -- and fails, mostly because, if gun availability isn't the problem, then there is little you can pin on the NRA outside of insensitivity. At times, "Bowling for Columbine" is funny, at times it's ridiculous, and at times it's inspiring -- as when K-Mart agrees to discontinue the sale of ammunition because Moore trots a few Columbine victims in front of them.
And at the end it's cruel, as Moore arrives at close to dawn to launch a two-minute attack on NRA president Charlton Heston, already suffering from Alzheimer's, by peppering him with ridiculous questions about why Heston showed up in Denver and Flint, Mich., days after school shooting tragedies. Moore dives into Heston so fast that he ravages the actor for thinking America's violent history and mixed ethnicity might have something to do with our modern gun violence. It is the "mixed ethnicity" comments that NRA watchdogs and liberals pounced on -- they wanted to paint Heston was a racist gun goon, I guess -- but to argue that racism has played no role in this nation's violent upbringing is to swear off reality. I'm sure Moore thinks he's pulled a fast one on Ol Moses, but friends I've spoken with since I've seen the movie were split 50/50 on Moore's questionable ethics in that scene. "Bowling for Columbine" was a hit at the Cannes Film Festival in France. Well of course it was, and so it will be all over the world -- the movie is a firm indictment of America's cavalier attitude toward death and violence. It is our greatest problem. "Bowling for Columbine" states that fact, and if there are Americans who weren't worried before, may they see this movie and become worried. From my own vantage point, I fear Moore's pissed and scared off so much of the pertinent establishment in America that he will live out his career interviewing high school dropouts and bullying Dick Clark as Clark zooms away in a promo van. We can jeer and laugh for a little bit, and Moore might even win the (da da da dum!) Academy Award for this film, but he's painting himself into a jester's corner and, eventually, the crowd is going to file away.
Rating: 
Summary: best history ever
Review: This is indeed the best film on a very dry topic - Americans and guns- I've ever seen before. I do hope that many people learn a bit about that crucial problem of how to handle (American) history and guns.
Rating:
Summary: I paid for my friends to see this film
Review: I have seen this film three times in theatres and will be buying the widescreen DVD. This film is not pro or anti guns. Instead this film looks at the reasons why America uses guns to kill each other with a frequency unmatched anywhere else in the world. This film is not anti-NRA, Moore actually supports the NRA's mission of teaching gun safety and responsible gun ownership. This film does leave the viewer horrified at the NRA's repeated decision to roll NRA President Heston out to any community grieving after a senseless gun tradgedy to intone his famous line, "From my cold dead hands" as he holds a long weapon aloft. Moore asks the viewer to consider possible root causes for the extraordinary degree of gun violence, and suggests that America has developed a culture of fear (and violence) that lends itself to the overly quick reaching for a gun. I grew up hunting deer and pigs, owned several rifles, and support the second ammendment and the less malignant actions of the NRA. That said, I think the second ammendment was written over 200 years ago and perhaps should itself be ammended. Further, I can not condone the reprehensibly insensitive and agressively pain inducing actions of the NRA and Heston. I most strongly recommend this movie to everyone; I bought tickets for my friends so they could see this amazing film in the theatres.
Rating:
Summary: It will change your perception of life in America.
Review: This is one of the most thoughtful movies I have ever seen. For all those that blither on about gun control - you have missed the whole point of the movie. Moore tries to understand what is at the root of our Country's level of violence. He concludes Gun Ownership, itself, is NOT! First off, go to the World Health Organization and look up "homicide rates United States" and the second article shows -
"Homicide rates for Japan, the United States and Brazil are respectively 0.6, 7 and 25 per 100 000 population. Firearm death rates in Asia are almost 100 times lower than in the Americas. 'We need to learn from these cross-cultural differences. Such insight could help in prevention and response,' added Dr Krug" Moore unravels a fascinating thread which reveals America's morbid fascination with fear. He presents his theory of where this fear originated. How it is fueled by mistrust, the media, intolerance, ignorance, greed, and public policy. Some of his statistics are presented without much detailed explaination (ie Per Captia) making them more sensational than useful but overall he will stun you with his observations of what is causing us to fear each other and so willing to react with violence whereas very similar people with roughly the same set of conditions (our Canadian neighbors) do not. Yes, the NRA, and Charleton Heston are made to look bad. But if your daughter or son, friend, relative, had been killed by soemone using firearms and you saw Heston touting the NRA in the neighborhood (Columbine, Flint MI) a few days later wouldn't you be outraged too? Moore, who is a member of the NRA and an avid gun owner, sure was.
Rating:
Summary: Not just guns, but media, culture, etc.
Review: I saw this in the theatre, and I'll be taking my Public Policy class to see it this month, and I ordered a copy for myself from Amazon.com. While most of us academics take refuge in "multi-factor" analyses, Moore really brings guns & media & fear & culture (N.B. not just guns) to the fore in this trademark in-your-face documentary. While I admire the dry, honest thoroughness of researchers like John Donahue and Ian Ayers, and enjoy the fighting if dishonest spirit of John Lott-Rosh, I think Moore will have a much larger effect on publicizing arguments about public policy. These debates have always been hot rather than "bright" (excepting Donahue et. al.) and Moore brings both heat and light.
Rating:
Summary: Wow
Review: This is the best film ever made ever. It makes me ashamed that our country has gotten this bad. Michael Moore is my hero. Also check out his other films Roger & Me, and The Big One. I don't know about you but I'm moving to Canada...
Rating:
Summary: Asks hard questions and dismisses simplistic answers.
Review: I watched this film in a theater in San Francisco. The crowd was the usual sampling of the Berkeley Liberals who are so numerous in this part of the world. As the film began I listened to the audience laugh at what they perceived to be jokes pointed at the Right-wing crazies that Moore interviews. (Having also grown up in Michael's home state, I know many not-right-wing, not-crazy people who share the same views.) I listened to the liberal laughter become more forced, then falter, then stop altogether as the movie progressed. By the time we were watching the footage from the security cameras at Columbine High School, there was stunned silence. This movie starts out seeming to be about guns, and many liberals will likely never see past the simple convenience of being gifted with more anti-gun propaganda. But this film asks questions that go way beyond gun control. Why is "ethnic diversity" the cause, in some minds, of gun violence in America? What is the connection between the workplace culture of the parents in Littleton, Colorado, and the alienation of the two boys who killed all those teenagers? What role DOES the mass media, especially the news media, play in exaggerating our fears? What is the connection between a six-year-old murderer and the celebrity owner of the restaurant chain which accepted government subsidies for employing the boy's mother, and kept her from supervising her son by forcing her to work too many hours? What makes us so afraid? Why do so many of us, both left- and right-wing, fear and mistrust our own government? Why don't we expect and demand better from our government officials? As infuriating and deeply disturbing as this film is, I'm glad I watched it. It made me think about the real world and the complex culture we live in. It made me think hard about the difficult business of making that world a better place. It helped me to see the answers from both Liberal Left and the Conservative Right for what they are: burecratic, simplistic, and ineffective.
Rating:
Summary: Amazing.
Review: All I really need to say is, amazing. This documentary was absolutely fantastic. The information given opens your eyes to many, many things. It makes you realize just how bad a country the USA is...especially when it compares the states to other countries. Great documentary.
Rating:
Summary: Actually, For the Thinkers In My Opinion
Review: The main theme behind this movie is not that guns should be banned, as some knee jerk reactionaries may have reviewed this movie as being. The point, at least as far as I can tell, that Moore is trying to convey is that fear is the cause of our gun problem. he points out the number of gun owners in canada is actually extremely high, thus discounting a correlation between gun ownership and death. It's this fear that's installed deeply into American culture, especially that of many whites in this country towards of african americans, which Moore illustrates very clearly. Overall, I think this movie dispenses a great amount of right wing propaganda that has spread like a virus thanks to this fear culture Moore discusses. Definitely pick this up if you see the theif in chief as a vile threat to your freedom and well being. An important piece of modern day cinema.
| 
