Bowling For Columbine

Reading 1: Genre

Bowling for Columbine is an interactive/participatory style documentary directed by Michael Moore. Michael Moore heavily emphasises multiple shooting events, in particular the mass shooting at Columbine High School, to present to us the idea that ordinary Americans are getting out of control with their use of weapons. He also promotes the concept of the American government’s actions having contributed to the current attitudes towards weapons. Michael Moore effectively uses the common techniques of the Interactive/Participatory style which are interviews, montages, and soundtracks. He also is very manipulative in how he uses these techniques as what is conveyed to us is not necessarily what is happening within America and how

E.g. when the US gave financial aid to Saddam Hussein (Iraq) to purchase weapons with which to fight Iranians. Later these weapons were used to invade Kuwait resulting in the US entrance into the first gulf war fighting the Iraqis. In this cleverly edited scene Michael Moore makes a mockery of Evan McCollum and what he says, by showing Americans how the government is manipulating their opinion on arms. Michael Moore later utilises this technique in the documentary Fahrenheit 911, where he uses multiple footages of George W Bush saying, “We’ll smoke him out”, and black and white footage from old television programmes of cowboys saying the exact same thing, making a mockery of his political

The idea of a weapons company as a “protector” plays on the fear of perceived threat from foreign countries. Michael Moore is more concerned with the proximity of the weapons plant to Columbine High School and its possible influence on the shooters comfort around weapons. He follows the interview with the public relations person from Lockheed and Martin with a montage of film footage of Americans distributing arms in foreign countries then later bombing the same countries, suggesting that distributing arms fed American society’s fears of these foreign countries. This confronts the audience with evidence of the government’s changing relationships over time, and supports the hypothesis that Julie Hanus from utne.com says “Fear becomes a cycle that is all but impossible for politicians to