5 Reasons Why Bowling For Columbine Is Not A Real Documentary
Michael Moore’s approach to making a documentary is “The facts don’t match my opinion? Oh well, I’ll just cut and edit it so it looks like I’m in the right and then just lie a lot to get the rest of the footage I need”.
I first saw Bowling For Columbine (a documentary by Michael Moore about gun violence in America and the 1999 Columbine High School Massacre) in a Film Studies lesson when I was a naive fourteen year old. At the time, it seemed like the answer to my prayers. I was in favour of gun control in a big way back then and still am to an extent, and here was an intelligent and entertaining film about gun violence that made a lot of good points. Then just a few months ago, during one of my usual 1AM trawls of the internet, I discovered that its about as truthful as Bill Clintons claim that he did not have sexual relations with that woman. Unlike a credible documentary maker like Louis Therouxs approach which is to observe and ask neutral questions, thus letting the audience make up their own mind about the issue, Michael Moores approach to making a documentary is The facts dont match my opinion? Oh well, Ill just cut and edit it so it looks like Im in the right and then just lie a lot to get the rest of the footage I need. This is despite the fact that the definition of a documentary is A work, such as a film or television programme, presenting political, social, or historical subject matter in a factual and informative manner and often consisting of actual news films or interviews accompanied by narration. With that in mind, here are five reasons why Bowling For Columbine isnt a real documentary...