I just saw bowling for columbine

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
I've just heard too much and read too much criticizing this "documentary" to ever feel inclined to watch it. By many accounts it's a biased, super-edited piece of antagonistic filth. I can get that for free surfing ATOT.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,402
8,574
126
i like how he managed to dupe hollywood into thinking it was a documentary so he could win an oscar. maybe i should make a film about... oh... killer tuna and pass it off as a documentary as well. maybe i'll win.

i'm wondering why the perfect storm wasn't entered into the documentary category.
 

Bulk Beef

Diamond Member
Aug 14, 2001
5,466
0
76
Originally posted by: Skoorb
I've just heard too much and read too much criticizing this "documentary" to ever feel inclined to watch it. By many accounts it's a biased, super-edited piece of antagonistic filth. I can get that for free surfing ATOT.
I read about it, and felt compelled to see it for myself. While I think downloading movies is a complete waste of time, I wasn't about to give Moore one cent of my money.

 

JulesMaximus

No Lifer
Jul 3, 2003
74,586
986
126
Originally posted by: jjsole
I didn't like the photo thing at the end, too over the top, but it was an awesome DOCUMENTARY.


(CAPS so that anyone who disagrees with the word has something larger to stuff wherever they'd like. :p)

Main Entry: 1doc·u·men·ta·ry
Pronunciation: "dä-ky&-'men-t&-rE, -'men-trE
Function: adjective
Date: 1802
1 : being or consisting of documents : contained or certified in writing <documentary evidence>
2 : of, relating to, or employing documentation in literature or art; broadly : FACTUAL, OBJECTIVE <a documentary film of the war>
- doc·u·men·tar·i·ly /-m&n-'ter-&-lE, -"men-/ adverb

Hmm, the words FACTUAL and OBJECTIVE would lead me to the conclusion that this piece of work by mr. moore does NOT meet the definition of a documentary. Just because Hollywood deems it a documentary doesn't make it so.
 

BeauJangles

Lifer
Aug 26, 2001
13,941
1
0
Wow, topics on Bowling for Columbine should just be banned from here on out. There is no point in continuing to argue either side, it's all be done at least ten times before.
 

MegaloManiaK

Golden Member
May 27, 2003
1,207
0
0
Originally posted by: FallenHero
READ THIS

Wow, i read the above link and just wow.

The guy doing the page put his side comments on seperate pages with links, this is one of those.


http://www.hardylaw.net/mooresepiphany.html

NB: I wish I could claim credit for the following insight, but actually it was emailed to me.

As a matter of style, Moore's works have always tended toward disorganization; as one commentator put it, he wanders about like magpie, picking up anything shiny and sticking it into his nest, wherever it might fit.

But Bowling is exceptional. A film which clearly begins with a theme of firearms, firearm owners, and firearm organizations being dangerous or even evil, ends with a conclusion that having lots of firearms and firearm owners is not a problem after all. We start with the Michigan Militia, and end up talking in his utopia, taking to its resident gunnies about how easy it is to acquire guns.

We don't have a chronology of Bowling, but Moore's statements suggest he began work on Bowling in 2000. He did a lot of the filming over summer, 2001. The K-Mart demonstration occured in June 2001. Moore gave a speech discussing Bowling in July of that year. And the earliest versions of Bowling have a 2001 date assigned, and were showing in February 2002.

It's reasonable to assume that by winter 2001, Moore is well into post production, perhaps ready to put his movie in the can.

Then comes 9/11.

Moore's comment on that shocking event (since deleted from his website, but available elsewhere) began:

This started out as a documentary on gun violence in America, but the largest mass murder in our history was just committed -- without the use of a single gun! Not a single bullet fired! No bomb was set off, no missile was fired, no weapon (i.e., a device that was solely and specifically manufactured to kill humans) was used. A boxcutter! -- I can't stop thinking about this. A thousand gun control laws would not have prevented this massacre. What am I doing?


Might it be that the disjointed nature of Bowling, the complete reversal of its theme in the last ten minutes, stems from this sudden insight? Bowling started out as one movie, but ended as another? (Or at least partially ended as another -- Moore didn't want to have to rework it from the beginning, and so just reshot the end?)