Quote:
Originally posted by RougeUnderoos@Sep 26 2005, 06:40 PM
Not to swerve too far off-topic here, but that movie was on TV last night and I wasn't a big fan the first time but it gets even worse with age. The part about Canada is positively ridiculous. People in Toronto don't lock their doors? I wonder how many TOers he had to ask before he got the answer he was looking for.
Anyhow, it seems to me that they are more afraid of crime than ever but that's just what I get from watching television. No idea if its reality though. We aren't far behind I don't think. "Get tough on crime..." is a mantra we hear as well.
|
I hear ya.
I dislike the same things about Bowling for Columbine that I dislike about Michael Moore (surprise). It takes huge ideological leaps without filling in a lot of the factual blanks. Stuff like 'GW is evil' without really saying, comprehensively, why he is evil, instead choosing a single example or two to prove a total point.
However, the things I DO really like about Michael Moore (and Bowling for Columbine) is that he's good at bringing the issue up. I find often that the important thing about the left-wing docu-peices (bowling, farenheit, even supersize me) aren't that they are a a-z factual representation of their point of view (not possible in 2ish hours), but they DO bring up the issue of gun control, fear of violence in America, health of everyday-foods.
These are issues we should be talking more about, regardless of what 'side' you're on. BfC got people thinking about Columbine, thinking about guns, thinking about the past, etc., etc.
One thing I find that a lot of us forget is that 'pop'-documentaries are created to speak to 'everyone', not just the learned, 'educated elite'. It sacrifices academia in order to relate to the masses. I mean, I hated 9/11 because, in many factual senses, I didn't believe it went far enough. Other, less 'current-event' inclined people I know were 'blown away' by the concepts brought up in the movie moreso than the facts.
I'm not saying facts aren't important, they're a huge factor. But only in-as-much as they prove or disprove an 'idea' or theory. It's the idea/theory, I think, that's really important.