Bowling for Columbine Is Not a Documentary Essay

Michael Moores Bowling for Columbine, the film which won an Oscar for best documentary, is non in fact a documentary, but preferably more of a persuasive essay in film format. The wide accepted definition of documentary is a film emphasizing or expressing things as perceived with forth distortion of personal feelings, insertion of fictional matter, and stripped-down editting, and Bowling for Columbine does not show any of these characteristics. Instead of presenting a neutral placement of the issues, it is clearly biased and concludely manipulates the viewing audition into agreeing with Moores opinions.In the process, Moore frequently uses incorrect statistics and information. In some cases fabricated tell apart is also inserted. Documentaries should encounter close to no editing of the evidence, moreover in some cases Moore uses sly editing techniques to deceive the viewers. A prominent role model of this can be seen in Charlton Hestons speech. It appears as though the NR A president is holding protest r every(prenominal)ies in response to the gun related incidents in Columbine and Flint Michigan, holding a musket up and proclaiming I have only five words for you from my cold dead hands whilst the gathering cheers.Moore makes a point of cutting from scenes of heartbroken victims to Hestons arrogant speeches. The purpose of this is to demonize Heston, and also all the members of the NRA. He wants the earreach to perceive all gun lovers as heartless, selfish monsters. However on closer observation, it turns pop Moore simply grabbed segments from Hestons former speeches, splicing them together to form a new one, completely different from what the president had intended. Documentaries argon meant to lay out the truth, whilst here the film has morphed the truth into a lie instead.Going choke to the definition, Bowling for Columbine again falls short of being a documentary through its failure to include only correct, actual evidence. Moore chooses to use incorrect facts the national gun murder statistics that seem abnormally high atomic number 18 sourced from the National Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, and is a combination of gun related and non gun related incidents, so is wherefore irrelevant to what the documentary was trying to say.The rockets shown in the Lockheed Martin sequences and being driven though the streets of Littleton in the night be in fact space set in motion vehicles, not weapons of mass destruction as Moore claims. These facts, false in nature, are again put there to distort the truth and make the viewers believe that things are more horrifying than they actually are, so that they are more susceptible to Moores mental manipulation. One of the fundamentals of a documentary is that it must present facts, and obviously Bowling for Columbine has not fulfilled that requirement.Throughout Bowling for Columbine, Moore presents an extremely biased view of events. Moore does everything in his power to manipulate viewers into see things from his eyes. Many are many persuasive techniques are used to achieve this. The film horrifies the audience with confronting scenes from the 9/11 attacks and the Columbine shooting. A Brief History of the States makes people see Americans as cowardly and pathetic. Charlton Hestons speech angers the audience and makes them turn against gun lovers.There are many more examples, however the point is that documentaries should be neutral and informative, yet the film actively tries to core the viewers to a narrow-minded conclusion. In summary, although Bowling for Columbine may be a creative persuasive film, it is most certainly not a documentary. Not only does the film fail to adhere in any way to the definition of a traditional documentary, it largely utilises jerry-built techniques to push Moores artificial and contrived point of view.