I finally watched Bowling for Columbine today. It was interesting to see it for the first time after having 15 different opinions fed to me about the subject - the movie has become one of its own after all.
I was actually pretty happy with the film. In the past I have been known to dismiss most of what Michael Moore says because he tends to go too far, throwing out claims that are silly or downright false. Even after seeing this film, I believe Moore’s style is often self defeating.
I was able to look past some of the manipulation in this film to see the true value. It is clear to me that Moore is a mostly sincere person who truly cares for the disenfranchised. Granted we only see him through Moore-colored glasses, but I still believe his sincerity to be greater than many he targets.
It seems interesting that the apparent culprit in our society’s violence problem is the media. Moore got caught on tangents, attacking Charlton Heston overly much at times. Perhaps he knew if he came out and said what his conclusion was, the conclusion would be rendered incorrect. Better to let the movie-going public analyze the film and say, “You know, I think the real damning evidence points to the media.”
Bowling for Columbine truly results in a discussion. I’m interested in passing the movie on to my semi-automatic gun-totting friend to see his reaction. I want to know if he’ll look past the NRA-bashing and see Moore’s points. Even if the movie only results in an even-keeled debate between the both of us, wouldn’t that be enough to consider it a success?