Response to Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" and book "Stupid White Men"

Essay by Prue750College, Undergraduate December 2006

download word file, 2 pages 0.0

Downloaded 10 times

After watching Bowling for Columbine for my second time, I had the same reaction I did as the first time. I was appalled at the statistics Moore gave and the reactions of the people he interviewed. The brother of the Oklahoma-City-bombing-guy was just psycho and I don't think there was one part of the movie that didn't intrigue me because of it's shock value.

I was most shocked when I heard the stats regarding violence and deaths in the US compared to other countries. How are these numbers possible? It seems too far-fetched that the US can have a gun-related death rate in the thousands and other countries don't exceed 100. I think a lot of Moore's content is like that all seems too outrageous to believe. I read his book Stupid White Men and that's what I was thinking the whole time. "No way! This stuff can't be true! It sounds too obvious or extreme to be the truth and to have no one notice it until now."

While I enjoy Moore's work, I do have some criticisms. In the movie it is especially apparent when he is talking to the principal of the first grader who was shot. His words seem comforting, but his body language is saying that he is only saying those things for the camera and not because he actually means them. His hands were in his pockets and when he took one out to console the woman, it just looked fake and rehearsed. The other criticism I have is that Moore seems to pick out one person and say "This is the person we should blame, and if not blame them, then go to them and single them out as someone who contributed the most." In the movie you can see this when...