Bowling for Columbine Is Not a Documentary Essay Example for Free

Bowling for aquilege Is not a Documentary EssayMichael Moores Bowling for Columbine, the film which won an Oscar for best documentary, is not in fact a documentary, but rather more of a persuasive essay in film format. The widely accepted definition of documentary is a film emphasizing or expressing things as perceived with come on distortion of personal feelings, insertion of fictional matter, and minimal editting, and Bowling for Columbine does not memorialize any of these characteristics. Instead of presenting a neutral view of the issues, it is clearly biased and purposely manipulates the viewers into agreeing with Moores opinions. In the process, Moore frequently uses incorrect statistics and information. In some cases fabricated evidence is also inserted. Documentaries should have mingy to no editing of the evidence, however in some cases Moore uses sly editing techniques to deceive the viewers. A dramatic example of this can be seen in Charlton Hestons speech. It appe ars as though the NRA president is holding take issue rallies 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 crowd 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 auditory modality to perceive all gun lovers as heartless, selfish monsters. However on closer observation, it turns out Moore simply grabbed segments from Hestons former speeches, splicing them together to form a new one, completely diametrical from what the president had intended. Documentaries are meant to lay out the truth, whilst here the film has morphed the truth into a lie instead.going away back to the definition, Bowling for Columbine again falls short of being a documentary by means of its failure to include only correct, factual eviden ce. Moore chooses to use incorrect facts the national gun tally statistics that seem abnormally high are sourced from the National Centre for Disease Prevention and Control, and is a confederacy of gun related and non gun related incidents, so is at that placefore 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 are in fact space piece 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 essential present facts, and obviously Bowling for Columbine has not fulfilled that requirement.Throughout Bowling for Columbine, Moore presents an exceedingly biased view of events. Moore does everything in his power to manipulate viewers into see things from his eyes. Many are more 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 America 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 force 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. non only does the film fail to adhere in any way to the definition of a traditionalistic documentary, it largely utilises deceptive techniques to push Moores artificial and contrived point of view.