Rating: 
Summary: Laughing all the way to the graveyard.
Review: I can be just as annoyed with Michael Moore as the next fellow--and not just because his name is similar to mine and he looks a little like me. He is far from immune to the common charges flung at him: manipulator, grandstander, camera hog, knee-jerk radical. Yet all of these accusations become irrelevant when he has a subject equal to his outrage and his caustic wit. "Bowling for Columbine," an impassioned plea for gun control, may well be his finest, most outraged movie yet. Juxtaposing stock footage with modern-day interviews and running commentary, he roils the audience with shocked laughter, then plain old shock, and finally shocked mourning. Moore's great theme is the bottomless capacity of human beings to be both stupid and cruel, and in "Bowling for Columbine," he uncovers abundant stupidity and cruelty. Worthies such as James Nichols (brother of Oklahoma City bomber Terry Nichols) hang themselves with their own rhapsodic paeans to their love of guns and fear of their fellow man. Moore has an incredible ability to get militia men, drug dealers, bomb throwers and their ilk to confess to their crimes on camera, as if they were talking about their day at the zoo. For Michael Moore, it's always a day at the zoo, and at the end of the movie he stalks particularly big game in the person of Charlton Heston, erstwhile superstar and current NRA president. As Moore grills Heston about the NRA's decision to hold a rally in Flint, Mich., just days after the shooting in Flint of six-year-old Kayla Rolland by her first-grade classmate, he deftly strips away Heston's brave facade to show the hollow man underneath. The Heston interview brings "Bowling for Columbine" to a particularly mournful close, as the audience--like Moore--is left wondering when the madness finally will stop. Not any time soon, unfortunately.
Rating: 
Summary: Moore - Rush Limbaugh of the Left
Review: This movie is too scattered to offend or persuade anyone. It bludgeons the emotions like "Titanic" or "ET," and it has about as much to say. That's why viewers gave it rave reviews and reviewers were lukewarm. I saw it with several other people, and it didn't raise any questions or discussion except for its the strange shortcomings. So bring a date and an extra hanky, it's a great date movie that's guaranteed to not spark an arguement. Everybody likes candy, just don't pretend it's health food. Moore is at his best describing mid-western life or skewering the media. But Moore is supsiciously like Rush Limbaugh. Moore and Rush are both chubby little media conglomerates, who are effective at skewering the rest of the media's bias and shortcomings (not exactly heavy lifting) even though each of them bombards his loyal audience (Rush's dittoheads, Moore's ???) with diatribes that are heavy on style, short on facts, and always pushing their own fear-driven agenda about US foriegn policy. In a very real sense, Michael Moore has become the kind of media spawn that he and his viewers supposedly hate and distrust. Moore's worst is when he says repeatedly that Clinton bombed Kosovo the day of Columbine, and that the Columbine shooters may have been inspired by the bombing. Also, his pointed questions in "earnest" puzzled tones worked well when he was needling GM, but when Moore uses exactly the same "earnest" tone with shooting victims he's just creepy. Letterman can go convincingly from wiseguy to sincere on a live show, but Moore can't pull that off even with post-production edits, showing his limitation as an interviewer. Another segment described the woman whose 6 year old shot a classmate while she was in a work-to-welfare program. Moore goes on and on about her "40 mile commute." Later we see the charter bus the state provided, and the mall where she worked. Sad story, but not the Middle Passage. Moore trying to link Dick Clark to the shooting was like playing "Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon," and his interview of Charlton Heston confirms that Moore isn't afraid of intellectual sparring with 80 year old celebrity spokesmen. And his depiction of Canada is very unrealistic (I've lived there). "Columbine" touches on teen alienation and despair in the American consumer culture. Strangely, Moore leaves out issues like Ritalin side-effects, toxic teen sexual relationships, child abuse, and the strings of copy-cat shootings that follow intense media coverage. Moore also grills a Lockheed-Martin employee (Columbine's biggest employer) about the missiles they make, and asks if it isn't natural for kids to go on a shooting spree because of their anguish over US foriegn policy. People who weren't embarassed for Moore should listen to performance artist Jello Biafra talk about Columbine in "Hellburbia" on "Become the Media." As Biafra (who grew up near Littleton CO) points out, this was an affluent community of aerospace workers who were mainly evangelicals (people who can pass Defense Dept security polygraphs)whose kids thought the few "wierdos" (kids that listened to rock & roll) were "ruining" their envangelical public school. Biafra also tackles issues like child abuse and the attraction of becoming an international celebrity by bringing a gun to school. Biafra shares the same political views as Moore, but in 27 minutes he leaves Moore in the dust. Moore describes gun owners as brain-damaged cowardly racists in constant fear of media-hyped street crime and minorities (those sinister "other" people) although he doesn't explain why gun culture is strongest in the areas with fewest minorities. It would be interesting to hold a mirror up to this movie, and see if gun-haters live in constant fear of media-hyped shooting sprees and if for them the sinister "others" are rural gun owners. Nope, that would be too complex and potentially ambiguous for Moore, just like sending him and Rush on a blind date.
Rating: 
Summary: In Search Of
Review: Moore is more in this outrageously funny documentary. A little over 2 hours, "Bowling for Coumbine" lampoons America's love of the gun. Moore's comic book style fits the gallows humor and is easy on the audience. The movie is not subtle; but the issues are. Through interviews, action videos, cartoons, and stills, Moore underlines Charlton Heston's assessment (given late in the movie in a particularly pathetic interview) that "the US is a violent nation." Towards the middle of the movie, Moore ventures into Canada to discover surprisingly that Canada is also awash in guns. However, the number of gun-related homicides and suicides is negligible, measured on any scale. There must be something else afoot here. The something else, it is suggested, is fear. Canadians don't lock their doors, and anecdotally at least, do not feel afraid. Americans do. Moore explores the historical view. We are largely the sons and daughters of northcentral European outcasts, who descended from the murderous tribes that eventually became England, Germany, Holland, France, Serbia, and so on. Looking for religious freedom in the new land, they brought with them their swords, guns, and Bibles. Then, with Biblical ferocity, they murdered millions of Indians, enslaved millions of Africans and western islanders, and slaughtered several hundred thousand of their own in less than 200 years. The rest as they say is history. Violence begets violence and violence begets fear. Every violent man knows that the next man is also violent and so lives in fear. Thus, blacks fear whites, whites fear blacks, the rich fear the poor, who fear the rich, and so on. Under these conditions, it would be downright insane not take up arms to protect ourselves from each other. This we have done. And, as President Bush has told us recently, it is important to fire first. The solvent in which this brew ferments is, in fact, the country itself. Lockheed Martin, who builds missiles in Littleton, Colorado, the home of the Columbine massacre, is at the center of the film. Moore interviews its company spokesman on the floor of a Lockheed Martin weapons plant and asks: Is there any similarity between the Columbine murders and our use and sale of weapons of mass destruction overseas? The viewer is asked to sort this out. I say shrug it off. Rather, see the movie again, like you would consult a cartoon that tickles your funny bone. "Bowling for Columbine" is a howl.
Rating:
Summary: Are You Scared Yet? They Hope So.
Review: *****
I was lucky enough to catch Mike's new film yesterday in Seattle, and spent the entire two hours alternately laughing, crying, and gnashing my teeth. Mike takes a comically painful look at America's proclivity for violence and dares to ask the question 'why?' Some say that we have more guns laying around, or that we watch too many bloody movies, play too graphic video games... Others point out that the Country was built on Native genocide and Slave labor. In Mike's analysis, that just doesn't add up. The rest of the Western World - and especially Canada - intake just as much violent entertainment, have just as many guns laying around, and have just as much national history of indiscriminate killing and subjugation of other races. What makes us so special when it comes to American gun deaths and our export of violence to the rest of the World? This film is not anti-gun, it is pro-reality. Everyone in America deserves to be exposed to the ideas and questions posed by this film. It will make you wonder why you lock your doors at night, and steer clear of the 'wrong side of town' - for a whole new set of reasons. A truly remarkable film. I would watch it 10 more times if it was still playing....
Rating:
Summary: Outstanding film!
Review: Wow, I saw this movie last night and thought it was extremely well done. The message that Michael Moore is trying to send to America is very powerful and very justified. Things are getting way out of hand. I am Canadian was thus was very interested in the parts of the movie that dealt with Canada, and a comparison of it with the United States. I will say that Mr. Moore did exagerate in some areas - alot of us actually do lock our doors, and certainly there are worse neighbourhoods than what he showed us. But still, in general his comparisons were fairly justified and clear. The statistic that Canada had 165 gun related deaths last year, compared with almost 12000 gun deaths in the States in mindblowing! Canada has only about 10-15% the population of the states, yet the US has almost 100 times the number of gun related deaths. It's insane. Charlton Heston makes himself and the NRA in general look really bad as they callously discard the deaths of students in schools, and don't even want to listen to any kind of statements that might imply there is something wrong with guns. My favourite Heston quote from the film, which is repeated several times, is "from my dead hands" (referring to what it will take to get him to discard his guns). Like how hardcore can you be about guns, I don't understand. Also Marilyn Manson was very well spoken and really came off well. It's interesting that Marilyn Manson came off better than almost every other American they showed in the movie. I can only hope that many people go out and see this movie and take what it says to heart. Bravo Mr. Moore.
Rating:
Summary: Should be required viewing for all Americans
Review: Just want to add my vote that this documentary is Moore's best film technically, with the cleanest editing and most beautiful, fluid visual and sound choreography of his past 3 films. And, it shows how much he loves America and believes in its people and their potential. In fact, he may have created the most important film of our time. I feel it is important to write this review because some of the reviewers think Michael Moore (and this film) is anti-gun. They also think he wants us to walk away angry. I disagree. Michael Moore shows us his NRA life-time member card as well as his trophies won in shooting contests. The main theme of the film is, why does America have over 10,000 homicides a year when other countries with just as many guns and ethnicities have under 1,000? Why do Americas keep guns in the house that are not used for sport, fully loaded, when in other countries people (who own guns for sport) don't? Why do Americans, who statistically are in no more danger of being the victim of a crime than anyone in any other part of the world, distrust their neighbor to this extent? He also delves into the subject of whether we should blame rock music for the violent behavior of high school students, and if so, why not also blame bowling (which is what the kids who blew up Columbine did before they went on their rampage)? But seriously, he seems to say -- why not blame ourselves? After all, on the same day, America was bombing a third-world country. Moore also confronts the very important but little-mentioned fact that the media exploits crime, exacerbating peoples' fears, and in doing so, exploits the idea that most criminals are black and hispanic (he fully exploits the irony, that the media blows up petty crimes of minorities while caucasion white-collar executives at companies such as Enron and WorldCom are taking the economy of our entire country into a downward spiral). Bowling for Columbine gives all of us much to think about, and hopefully will be seen by as many people as possible. Films like this can help us all to remember our responsibility as citizens, not to allow ourselves to act out of fear, but instead, out of love for our neighbor and hope for the world that our children will inherit.
Rating:
Summary: It takes a lot to make me speechless...
Review: ...but...wow!
I mean, all I could say for about ten minutes after watching this film last night was..."wow". This is one of the most incredible and important movies ever made. I think it is also Michael's best. This movie doesn't point fingers. It doesn't lay blame (...directly). It presents the facts and leave it to open to the audience to make the conclusion. There are no answers given the film. "Bowling for Columbine" is an exploration of violence in American society. Michael honestly can not understand why we are so violent. He goes through the points that we have as much of a history of violence as other countries, as much violence in our media as other countries, and as many guns in our homes as Canadians. So why do we have such a staggering amount of gun deaths in this country compared to others? I'm not here to give you the answer (and neither is Michael), though they seem obvious after watching the movie. I think what Michael does right with his film this time is hold back. He is not nearly as incendiary as in his TV show or books. He let's the people involved speak for themselves. Agree or disagree with it's points, this is a movie EVERYONE should see. I am taking everyone I care about to this movie. It has a few disturbing laughs, and some scenes that really choked me up. You may have an emotional response to this movie, but PLEASE don't let that scare you off. I found this film completely inspirational, because it shows that there is still someone out there who believes he can make a difference...and he actually does.
Rating:
Summary: Hilarious, Touching and Thought-Provoking
Review: If only most fiction could be half as entertaining as this documentary, which isn't so much about Columbine as how Americans feel about each other. The documentary makes a powerful case that all too many of us see the others as "the enemy" - people we either fear or are in competition with. Citizens of other developed countries seem to feel more that they are there to help each other. ...So many segments of this film are, all by themselves, worth the price of admission. My only quibble is that the film might have been ten minutes shorter, as there is some unnecessary grandstanding at the end, but it is a very minor quibble in a work amounting to brilliance.
Rating:
Summary: Moore and Marilyn Manson tell the truth about American fear
Review: I just went to see Bowling for Columbine for the second time this morning. Of the numberous films I have seen here at the BIFF film festival in Bergen, Norway, this is the best one. As a Norwegian, I felt that the film made an extremely well presented, original point of view about consumer fear, not only viable in the States, but also here in Norway. Even though Marilyn Manson makes only a brief appearance in the film, it is an amazing moment when Moore asks Manson what he would like to say to the Columbine-kids, had he been given the chance to speak directly to them. He replied: 'I wouldn't say anything. I would listen to what they have to say.' How ironic that the person who was being indirectly blamed for influencing the Columbine-killers into executing the murders, is also the only one in the film touching on what may solve the problem with violence and fear: communication, not guns. I am deeply touched and exited about this film, and I recommend everyone to go see it. If not, you will miss out on one of the most original and powerful point of views constructed about a world (at least according to the media) gone mad.
Rating:
Summary: The United Rifles of America...
Review: In his previous documentaries, "Roger and me" and "The big One", Michael Moore targeted some big company leaders (Roger Smith from General Motors, and Phil Knight from Nike) who's fired most of their workers and closed their factories on the U.S. territory while they made hundreds of millions of dollars in benefits - Moore himself used to be a worker in General Motors factory in his native city of Flint, Michigan -, the filmmaker extends his action field and, from the massacre in the Columbine high school, in Littleton, Colorado (where two kids armed from head to toe, killed twelve pupils and one teacher after a bowling game), deals with his whole country addicted to all kinds of fire guns, with an average - and amazing - result of over 11,600 people shot dead every year. 'Whose fault is it, if the Americans are just a bunch of crazy cowboys?' Moore seems to ask in his film, edited like a documentary as well as an investigation. The fault of the whole political class, which organizes illegal destitutions all over the (third) world, finances and gives weapons to dictators and terrorists, sends bombs and missiles everywhere? Of the medias, which permanently keeps on an atmosphere of fear, suspicion and hate through violent and bloody pictures broadcasted daily, in the TV news, with an obvious commercial purpose? Of the poverty which hits mainly the Black people, who - as well as some hard rockers with weird figures and shapes, like Marilyn Manson - are put on an evil level in order to be used as guilty ones every time something wrong happens? From the supermarket of guns to the bank which gives a rifle as a gift when an account is opened, through an exhilarating cartoon in the "South Park" style, resuming in a few minutes the history of America, based upon fear, ignorance of the other in front and blood, the interviews of some teenagers at school, of some gun lovers (including Jerry Nichols, the brother of Terry, one of the two people who destroyed a building in Oklahoma City in 1995, killing 168 people), who consider the carrying of guns as a duty and a responsibility, and of a disgusting Charlton Heston - he's the president of the NRA (National Rifle Association) which still keeps encouraging the free market of fire guns all over the country -, Michael Moore, within only two hours, manages to tell with strength and an undeniable humor about all the more serious problems in the so-called land of free and the result is an astounding shocker, a great demonstration of the American paranoia, the admittance of powerlessness of a whole manipulated country. A must see, as soon as possible. Doesn't the official, State violence, encourage and lead to the individual violence?
|
