Quote:
Originally posted by Agamemnon@Sep 26 2005, 02:08 PM
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 they're 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, it 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.
|
That's a good point. He is bringing things up for discussion.
I am essentially "on his side" but my problem with that film is that it was so blatantly biased. There was really not a single dissenting opinion (that I recall) and his use of schmaltzy scenes (placing that little girls picture, and the time he sounded like he was going to cry when Dick Clark wouldn't talk to him) leave a bad taste in my mouth. But it's his movie and he can tell any story he wants any way he wants to.
If it was (and I believe it was) discussion he was trying to raise then he did a good job of it, even if he had to cut a few corners to get there.