Today's society present prevalent issues which are interpreted in different ways. One of these sources are documentaries, having the power to initiate these important conversations by exploring relevant issues. Such is the case with the subjective documentary Bowling for Columbine, directed and presented by Michael Moore. Following Moore's journey, he raises an absolute and factual interpretation of the gun culture in America. Through the use of interviews, voice over, different types of footage, juxtaposition and satire, Moore explores the role of fear, violence, the government and the media on the culture of American gun accessibility.
The destructive role of fear on America's gun control is explored primarily through Moore's use of satirical voice over, interviews and real footage. Moore compares their implicated country to an opposite nation. He interviews passers-by on a common busy street, and enquires them a fact about their fellow neighbour Canada, yet during the course his voice over rectify the interviews, stating quite an opposite statement. Similar to the U.S, Canada's gun accessibility and ammunition is in fact
…show more content…
“I hope the American people will be praying for the students, and their parents, and their teachers.” This statement from U.S President Bill Clinton during a conference in which he was referring to the Columbine tragedy has established a confounding sentiment as it contradicted his earlier statement, which included striking Serbia. This short scene gives quite a perception of the gun violence's basis, as Moore portrays violence to be a functional defense in the government's system and within the society. His use of the chronological footage fairly informs the viewers how America's resolution towards their dispute against other nations had evidently influenced the citizen's means of protection against the already escalated
Gun Ownership and Gun Control in Canada The Oscar-won documentary ‘Bowling for Columbine’ has aroused people’s awareness of gun ownership and gun control issues. Should gun ownership be banned or should guns be controlled? Does gun ownership create a violent society? The answer is not measurable, however, from the firearm situation between America and Canada, the answer is more obvious.
Aroung the time of John F. Kennedy’s assassination, the controversial and widely argued issue of gun control sparked and set fire across America. In the past decade however, it has become one of the hottest topics in the nation. Due to many recent shootings, including the well known Sandy Hook Elementary school, Columbine High School, Aurora movie theater, and Virginia Tech, together totaling 87 deaths, many people are beginning to push for nationwide gun control. An article published in the Chicago Tribune by Illinois State Senator Jacqueline Collins, entitled “Gun Control is Long Overdue” voiced the opinion that in order for America to remain the land of the free, we must take action in the form of stricter gun laws. On the contrary, Kathleen Parker, a member of the Washington Post Writers Group whose articles have appeared in the Weekly Standard, Time, Town & Country, Cosmopolitan, and Fortune Small Business, gives a different opinion on the subject. Her article in The Oregonian “Gun Control Conversation Keeps Repeating” urges Americans to look at the cultural factors that create ...
equally? It seems to me that the answer is no. The world did not seem
“I don’t believe people should be able to own guns. (Obama)” This said prior to Obama’s presidency, in the 1990’s, is still a topic that is constantly questioned today. Many American’s feel the need to seek ownership of weapons as a source of protection; While others believe that private ownership of guns will do nothing more but heighten the rate of violence due to people taking matters into his or her own hands. Philosophy professor Jeff McMahan agrees with Obama’s statement in regard to the ownership of guns. In his New York Times editorial titled “When Gun ‘Control’ Is Not Enough,” McMahan provides evidence to support his theory of the dangers that quickly follow when allowing the community to own guns legally. McMahan, throughout the text, shows responsible reasoning and allows the reader the opportunity to obtain full understanding and justifies his beliefs properly.
Bowling For Columbine is a well-directed documentary that informs people about gun violence in America. Michael Moore is successful in showing that America has been going through many gun tragedies; and portrays the sense that America’s problems are out of control. He conveys this through informative facts, images, and comparisons.
The documentary, Bowling for Columbine, is a strongly deceptive film which portrays America as a cruel, violent country. Although considered as an Academy Award Winning documentary, Bowling for Columbine fictionally depicts “gun violence” in the U.S; in reality gun violence is prevalent world wide. Guns are used for a multitude of reasons, not only violence towards others; It is ultimately the result of one’s personal actions and decisions. Regardless of the weapon, the person who uses it is responsible. In the documentary, Bowling for Columbine, Michael Moore provides a false perception of the overuse of guns in America, and deceives the viewers with angry humor and misleading examples.
In American society, violence runs rampage throughout the country that cause its citizens to be afraid and discouraged about their homeland. One of the major parts of American violence is from guns. In the documentary, "Bowling for Columbine", a famous filmmaker, Michael Moore addresses the ubiquitous situation in America. He argues that the use of gun in America co-insides or correlates to the recent massacres and that America, as a whole, should have stricter gun control laws. Throughout the film, Moore uses specific references to it and employs rhetorical and persuasive devices to construct his argument in favor of changing gun laws.
The documentary “Bowling for Columbine” by Michael Moore discusses the shooting at Columbine Highschool in April of 1999. While going into the details of the shooting, Moore aims to answer why gun violence and mass shootings are so prevalent in the United States compared to other countries. Despite how the arguments that Moore makes are backed up with statistics and results, the documentary still falls short of being a fully effective argument due to one logical fallacy.
Firstly, Moore does not interview anyone with credentials, a reliable background, or a professional with great insight on this issue. Rather, he interviews normal individuals, leading his film to be less credible. In fact, in one of the scene, he interviews three students that he finds in front of McDonald’s that are skipping school. Discussing an issue with such gravity with these students and other ordinary people is not sufficient to lead audiences to fairly balance the pros and the cons of having an easy access to guns. Furthermore, Moore also misrepresents several facts in the film, namely, the statistics of the deaths caused by gun violence in each country. To specify, he does not take the population or the number of deaths caused by other matters into consideration, making the information misleading. Most importantly Moore’s primary tactic for addressing his message is through pathos rather than logos. He shows heart-wrenching videos of a school shooting, evoking fear for guns in the audience and uses the shooting of a sweet six year old girl to capture the audience’s sympathy towards the victims of gun violence. As demonstrated, Moore presents distorted information and turns to pathos as his main method of persuasion, rather than facts, diminishing its
In the documentary ‘Bowling for Columbine’ directed by Michael Moore, we get the sense that we are being taken on a journey through the in depth insight we are given into the reasons behind America being such a ‘gun loving’ country. Bowling for Columbine is titled in remembrance of the Columbine High School massacre, where students Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold gunned down thirteen people in 1999 before committing suicide. The documentary explores a variety of factors that may have lead to and encouraged America's gun loving culture.
Various documentary filmmakers attempt to change or improve society in some way with their documentaries. Their overall goal is to bring to light a certain cause or injustice with the hope that their film will help stimulate the masses to demand change. The hard hitting documentary and bureaucratic documentary filmmaker Michael Moore explores the circumstances that lead to the 1999 Columbine High School massacre and, more broadly, the development of guns and the high homicide rate in America. The 2002 documentary focuses on America's love affair with firearms and the unhealthiness of destructiveness in the United States, which has the highest gun-murder rate in the world. The use of film techniques and editing the style of filmmaking that makes
In this article the author Fawn Johnson gives us a brief look of what goes on during the great gun control debate. This article gives us a look at the gun control proposals, from American’s not bein...
Moore’s 2002 film, Bowling For Columbine, successfully manipulates facts to convey only a single side of the American attitude towards gun related crime.
Bowling for Columbine depicts the overwhelming gun violence in America. Despite Director Moores efforts to make an informative documentary his bias is evident. With the use of exaggerated facts, emotional exploits, and blatant bias. Moore shares his personal perspective on the availability of firearms in America.
I believe film can be very effective in creating awareness around the issue of violence of education, as films I watched around the topic of violence during high school have resonated with me. I previously watched Bowling for Columbine in grade 11, and was very surprised to see how gun control was in the United States in Comparison to Canada. As I watched the film for the second time during this week’s lesson I remembered many scenes vividly, as the issues discussed in the film are very informative and were easily communicated though the film.