TNMC
This site’s design is only visible in a graphical browser that supports web standards, but its content is accessible to any browser or Internet device.
Bowling for Columbine (2002)
Michael Moore has a real knack for the most cutting satire. His first film, Roger & Me tried to find out why General Motors had shut down its plants, impoverishing the very area the company grew from. That sounds serious, and the topic is that, but Moore used a guerilla approach to shooting the film that kept GM executives off balance and looking perpetually foolish. Moore used a similar approach to a short lived television series with similarly funny results. While Moore's methods may be on the shady side, there is no doubting the sincerity with which he champions a cause.
His latest film is Bowling for Columbine, in which he tackles guns in America. He wants to know why this country has a gun death rate far above that of other major industrialized nations like Britain, Germany and Canada. This is not the shrill cry of a fervent hater of guns. Moore himself is a lifelong NRA member. He makes a point of laying the problem in the lap of NRA president, actor Charlton Heston, looking for an answer or explanation. Why? Because the the iconic star makes himself an easy target when he holds a rifle over his head and proclaims "From my cold dead fingers!" to an NRA convention held in Colorado very soon after the Columbine massacre.
The movie is deliberately provocative and inflammatory. Moore understands his topic well and plays it like an instrument to get the emotional responses he wants. This could easily be a reason to criticize the film and Moore, except that he freely admits he doesn't know the solution anymore than we do. But by pointing out absurdity he makes his audience more open to possible explanations and ideas that aren't the norm. When the news media clusters around a podium for a press conference from some police chief or city official as a means of getting, Moore is interviewing ordinary people and just letting them talk. Even more impressive, he's watching and filming the news crews as they run like a pack of wolves to the podium or money shot, in this case a child's funeral. He interviews unlikely figures, like members of the Michigan militia, James Nichols (brother of convicted Oklahoma bomber Terry Nichols and tofu farmer) and shock rocker Marilyn Manson. The militia are surprisingly calm folks, Nichols has to be heard to be believed and Manson proves startlingly thoughtful. Some of his interviews are surprisingly touching. Talking to a security system salesman who breaks down at the memory of Columbine or a teacher who had a child shot and killed in her classroom, Moore shows a surprisingly light touch, stepping back and letting their emotions tell the story.
As I said, the film is deliberately inflammatory. Moore isn't doing that just because he enjoys pissing people off, although he probably does. He obviously wants to stir up debate, something that seems to have been forgotten in this era of extreme partisanship. He builds his case in a scattershot manner and mostly on anecdotal evidence. Unsurprisingly, not all of his ideas are sound but that's not really the point. At least he's looking for solutions.
Moore is a hard person to pin down. He makes documentaries but stages material and offers a heavily personal slant on his material that leaves the credibility of his films in doubt. But what makes his tactics effective is the contrast between his biting humor and his unkempt appearance. Most of the film has him in highly casual outfits and sporting an amazingly scruffy beard. His happy face conceals a devious mind that lures his victims in by appearing far more genial than he really is. Usually this lets him get close enough to people to get good footage before being thrown out. This is so standard that Moore himself is stunned when one of his stunts actually pays off in a result.
This is the sort of film that you will either love or hate, depending on what side of the debate you stand. It takes great liberties with the documentary format, but forgivably in the name of stirring debate. When politics are so severely polarized, it's wonderful to see something that blows past the typical knee jerk reactions in search of a more profound meaning or solution. Even when it has no idea what that might be.
What do you think? Talk about it on the Forums
