Josh H

It's not saying ethnicity is to blame. It's just a statistically proven observation.

What it says is that we need to work on improving the living conditions of poor inner-city minorities to reduce their likelihood of becoming criminals.

DodgingCars

Ok, people are kind of off topic. And I haven't really read all the political debate...

So I'll just comment on the film: Wow! I wasn't that eager to see this film. I used to be a fan of Moore's -- more his humor and creativity than his politics -- though I do agree with some of his beliefs. But this film was simply amazing. I went with my fiancee and we both walked out surprised at how good it was. I seriously couldn't stop talking about it for hours.

It made me laugh, cry (literally), and think. Glad I saw it.

Scot1458

Ok, so somebody answer me this.

did Harris and Kleibold kill the Columbine students, or did the firearms they had kill the students?

Pants

enough with the retorical questions, just state your opinion.

sundog

I liked Bowling for Columbine quite a bit. Moore creates a very smooth and varied flow. Like my favorite docs it covers a wide range of subjects but still maintains a strong central point, this in particular being modern American paranoia. Moore's shady tactics sometimes yield uncertain results (harassing a police officer just to be a smartass), but the overall humanity is touching. And those that are mocked (Nichols and Heston) seem pitiful rather than vilified.

So I can look past some snarky self-righteousness (silly cartoon) and see a compassionate voice asking questions rarely raised.

majorjoe23

Harris and Kleibold killed them, but the guns made it a lot easier. I doubt they could have punched 13 people to death before someone stopped them.

DeputyDave

OK, This conservative cop has finally seen “Bowling for Columbine”. First I would like to say that Michael Moore is very good at what he does and it is a very good movie that causes this much discussion afterwards. My (liberal) girlfriend and I spent about four hours talking about it. No arguing, no yelling, just bouncing ideas brought up by Mr. Moore.

First the Heston interview: Of course Heston knew who Moore was, and I applaud him for granting the interview. I think Heston forgot whom he was with towards the interview. During a free exchange of ideas he said something that was politically incorrect. Moore asked him why he felt America had more gun deaths. Heston after saying he didn’t know, began batting ideas. Maybe it is our violent history. Wrong, says Moore, England, Germany, and Japan have violent histories (much more violent than ours IMHO). So Heston suggests it may be our ethnic diversity. BOOM! Heston now realizes that this isn’t an open and honest discussion among friends but this is being filmed and he has stepped over that politically correct line. He rightly ends the interview.

For the record, Moore seemed to genuinely not know why we have this level of gun violence. When bringing up the above examples you MUST look at the differences to find the cause. Maybe ethnic diversity is not reason but is it right not to even discuss it because you fear being labeled a racist? Lets face it England, Germany, Japan, and yes even Canada with its “13 percent ethnic” have far less diversity than the US. In the areas where gun violence is at its greatest that diversity is much, much higher. Is that the cause? Maybe not, but it needs to be addressed before it can be put away.

The number one thing that most disappointed me about this movie was Matt Stone’s (I’m assuming it was him) cartoon. What a racist (yes I can use that term, whites are a race too) revisionist piece of crap. It implies that white Americans invented slavery. Slavery has existed for eons. The “noble savages”, our Native American brethren owned slaves, and did so for centuries before we came here. At the time of slavery in America slavery was thriving in Africa between waring tribes. Taking slaves was one of the bounties of tribal war. Most slaves not born into slavery were sold to white slave traders by rival tribes.
To imply that the Civil war was fought because whites feared a slave uprising is insulting to the MILLIONS of young men who volunteered and (many) died to end slavery. Yes, the Civil War was about much more than slavery but the majority of Northern soldiers volunteered to end that abomination, not for vague political and economic reasons.

I can’t tell you how offended I was by that cartoon. If Stone and Moore had skewed it so badly in portrayal of blacks they would be chased out of the country. For me it ruined a very well done “video essay”.

hgar78

i didn't come away with that impression at all! he never insinuates that we invented slavery, he just said we 'boarded a lot of boats and went and got some' (paraphrase obviously). and about the civil war, he never says it was fought BECAUSE of fear of uprising, his cartoon shows that once it began the whites who had OWNED slaves were fearful of what they could do to them. (you would be too if for years you treated something so horribly and when they finally had the support and the means to stand up to you they did).

i guess it's all a matter of opinion and personal interpretation but Moore never used such words as 'invented' or 'because' during these scenes in the cartoon. and that makes a big difference!

DeputyDave

I think you need to watch it again. It certainly implies that white Americans came up with the idea so they wouldn't have to work. As for the Civil War. It certainly does say that it was started because "white folk were scared" that there were now more blacks than whites in the South.

And let me ask you a question: if that cartoon were skewed so badly towards a minority would it be so amusing? It implied ALL whites were scared of blacks. ALL whites loved slavery. ALL whites were against Civil Rights. If I made a film using such totaly prejudiced statements about ANY other people I would be crucified.

hgar78

read my post again. i understand what you're saying but just by using the word IMPLY opens up the door to INTERPRETATION. you came away from the cartoon with an opinion, as did i, and we do so because moore avoided using words such as 'because' and 'invented'. in saying that the white people were scared, he didn't say this was the reason for the war, he just said they were now scared that so many blacks were in the south and fighting against them.

DeputyDave

What is the diference between saying "All Whites are afraid of Blacks" and "All Blacks commit crimes"?

Both are gross sterotypes. Both are equally untrue. But say one and you are a genius film maker, say the other and you are a racist Nazi.

BTW I always form my opinions after considering all sides and trying to understand what I don't agrre with. I have seen Michael Moores movies and they are (including this one) fine entertainment. I have read his books, and though his totally skewed politics come out much more obvious in print (especially in "Stupid White Men...") he is very funny. Although "Columbine" is a good film that opens up some VERY important discussions, it should never be taken as the whole truth. There needs to be a very open and frank look at this subject. One were EVERY option can be explored, with out fear of knee jerk labels.

DodgingCars

I took the cartoon to be a joke and didn't think it was meant to show what really happened -- but a twisted comical view of it. I thought it was funny.

I don't remember everything in it, but I don't remember being offended (I'm white).

If they did say that the American Whites invented slavery, then I think that would actually prove my point -- that it wasn't meant to be taken seriously. I think everyone, especially in America, knows that slavery has been around for thousands of years. Of course, the kind of slavery practiced in America was sort of a new invention.

Matt925

The cartoon had absolutely no purpose and I thought it was incredibly stupid to include it. All it can do is make his film weaker and give his critics and easy target to attack the film (no pun intended). The fear thing was already getting across with the interviews and news media segments. The cartoon added nothing but an incredibly skewed viewpoint that is very easy to criticize. It took me right out of the film, but I was able to get back in shortly after it ended. Would have been much stronger without it.

hgar78

i disagree. moore was obviously mimicking those old cartoons we were subjected to in elem. school ('how a bill gets passed' comes to mind) they are designed to appeal to young minds and help them understand complex scenarios or processes. by his using the format, i think it was a fun outlet to show how basic the idea of fear infiltrates everything we, as Americans, do. with the cartoon moore tried to strip down a concept to its barest, and most essential, elements. in the process, he provides an entertaining and simplistic/abstract 'lesson', one which as, intelligent individuals, we can fill in the blanks with our common-sense knowledge.

Matt925

That's an interesting take, but I don't think most people will see it that way. You can argue that the only reason is that it deals with such strong topics and emotions and that is a good thing. People should be challenged with it. But I still think the film would have been better off without it.

DeputyDave

But the cartoon is simply wrong on ALL counts. America was not founded on fear. The revolutiuonary war was not fought because of fear, nor was the civil war. Every white person is not afraid of blacks, not even a majority. In fact I would propose that a very small percentage of white America has any feelings of fear when it comes to blacks. Despite the media brain washing to the contrairy. Lets see a show of hands... how many white DVDtalkers are deeply afraid of black people...

So not only is it wrong, it is also insulting, To negativly stereotype all whites in such a cowardly, small brained, weak way is the same as making a cartoon about blacks portrayed as lazy, crazy, thieving, white woman raping savages. I maintain both are wrong and if people get offended by one than they should be offended by both.

MrN

We really can't get to a discussion of the validity of the second ammendment if we can't get past the concept that 'All men are created equal.'

Yes, there is a disproportionate representation in crime statistics by ethnic background. But, this disproportion is also seen in the distribution of wealth - something I feel is more significant, among other things.

To blame the actions of whatever group based on their ethnicity is not only rascism defined, but it reveals a lack of understanding of the deeper issues.

DeputyDave

I think not considering all sides to a problem is stupidity defined. No one (not even Heston) said that minorities are the reason why America is violent. I think we are discussing the film. In the film Heston is asked what he thinks makes America have more gun violence than England, Germany, Japan, and Canada. ONE (and only one) of Heston's supositions was that a diference between us and them is that America is more ethnicly diverse (much, much more). He did not say that blacks were killing everyone, he simply brought up a valid point that shouldn't be instantly ignored because we all fear the label fairy. We are a very diverse country and we don't know how to play well together.

Heston realized what he said and how it was going to be colored by idiots and rightly ended the ambush interview.

MrN

Unless the side we are considering presents no solution and is even more stupid.

So, what does this mean exactly? If we reduce diversity, that will lead to less violence? How do you propose to reduce diversity? I can think of a couple of ways, but then I would have to fear that label fairy.

I thought Heston knew who Moore was. In fact you posted upthread: "First the Heston interview: Of course Heston knew who Moore was, and I applaud him for granting the interview."

I believe Heston realized he slipped up and cut his losses. If he didn't mean to be misinterpreted by 'idiots' he should have explained himself. I'm willing to listen to this 'uncolored' explanation.

Matt925

That belief is something we really need to get past.

(Info taken from the FBIs official website ).

In the year 2001, 3,644 white people were murdered by 3,059 whites, 475 blacks, and 100 others.

3,087 black people were murdered by 180 whites, 2,802 blacks, and 105 others.

Race relations have nothing to do with our country's high level of homicide. I thought Moore did a pretty good job of making that point.

DeputyDave

I am not saying that race relations are the cause, and I don't think Heston was either. I think he was simply offering a possible answer to Moore's question. Nothing in Heston's past or character points to him being a racist or a bigot, quite the opposite. To take his statement and paint him as one I think is unfair. Just as if someone tried to paint me as one for engaging in this dialogue.

Matt925

I can't speak for anyone else, but I am not implying that you or Mr. Heston are racist. But you both said that one possible reason that the United States has so much more homicide compared with other countries is that the US is more ethnically diverse. This belief is pure poppycock.

HistoryProf

My fiance and I got to see this today finally and I really don't know what to say other than everyone in this country should see this movie. Incredibly powerful, funny, and in the end profoundly sad. There's almost too much to try and respond to in both the film and this thread....but a few thoughts/comments.

First off, who knew Marilyn Manson would come off as the most sane and insightful person in this or ANY film?!?!? Seriously though, i agree that he showed himself to be anything but the monster newsmedia outlets would love us to believe he is....that supposedly 'liberal' media at that....if nothing else, that was shown to be the giant red herring that it is....liberal only in the sense that they are liberally complicit in perpetuating shockwaves and fear mongering.

As for the cartoon, i agree wholeheartedly with hgar78's take on it....it was satire as much as anything. And as much as dgeralsh doesn't care to admit it, the fear of blacks by white, ESPECIALLY in the South where much of the cartoon was essentially based, was most certainly a reality for a very very very long time. To say that it has thus simply ceased to exist is simplistic and dangerously shortsighted. Jim Crow was born of that fear, and the boogeymen of black men raping white women, etc. have been burned into the psyches of a whole lot of Americans whether you like it or not. It just is, and ignoring it won't help it any. As for the northerners who "fought to end slavery" - well, that just isn't true, and there are many many many books out there that make those points more lucidly than I could here. Suffice it to say that many northerners had serious qualms with the war because of the role of blacks, and they most certainly didn't want them having any guns (a point made in the cartoon). The whole idea of a country of whites fighting over the fate of it's black citizenry is simply ridiculous, especially when you recognize the ignominious role those blacks had in that country. The civil war was indeed about slavery in many ways (mostly economic ones), but not in the benevolent sense that people like to imagine today in order to make themselves feel better.

Which brings us back to Moore's central thesis as I saw it....that is: Fear in this country has been and continues to be the primary currency in the media and it is the hammering away at those fears that continues to engender the incredibly destructive and violent streak in our country. Furthermore, the perpetuation of those fears keeps us in line, keeps us buying stuff, and keeps us from asking too many questions. It's sad. terribly sad. And I found it ridiculous that the primary fault i've read in reviews is that Moore "doesn't answer any of the questions he raises." How in the hell could he? He's just as mystified as the rest of us, but he's also smart enough to recognize that there are terrible, and very real, problems with our culture and our increasingly precarious perch of self-righteousness and chest-thumping patriotism. It's not getting any better, and Moore is simply trying to show us that...to smack us upside the head and get people to start thinking for crying out loud.

As for Mr. Heston. He would have to have been hiding in a cave for the last decade in order to not know Moore or his politics....he knew very well who he was dealing with. In the end, he exhibited much of what is so frustrating in trying to understand our 'gun culture' and it's relationship with violence in America. I found the most telling part of the interview in Heston's inability to really justify his having loaded guns in his own home when he's in a gated posh beverly hills community and never faced any kind of a threat in his lifetime. If that isn't representative of some irrational fear rationalized by empty and bloated 2nd ammendment rhetoric i don't know what is. There is something very wrong there, but it's hard to pinpoint....I don't know either....I just know that i find THAT a helluva lot more scary than africanized bees In the end, Heston did little more than demonstrate two things in my mind: First, that so much of the NRA and their posturing that absolutely any restrictions on any guns is an assault on our rights is mindless, fear-mongering BS. People of that mindset rarely have any lucid argument at the ready when confronted, they just repeat the same "from my cold dead hands" ballyhoo and question your patriotism....heady stuff Secondly, that Moore showed himself to be genuinely in search of answers to extremely difficult questions - questions that the standard rhetorical 2nd ammendment BS just doesn't come close to addressing. And when you take that away, there's very little left to chew on except for those deeply ingrained fears steeped in historical characterizations of devilish colored folks (black, Indians, Mexicans...you name it, they've been portrayed as such) praying on our wives and children. Heston's 'ethnicity' remark belies that....however subconsciously.

Anyway.....I can't say i 'enjoyed' Bowling for Columbine, but I found it to be one of the most important films to come along in a very long while. It raises so much for us to consider that my fiance and I were literally unable to discuss it for a while....and I think that's a good thing. I hope as many people see this as humanly possible.

Oh, and one more thing - i find the R rating to be uncalled for, and in a lot of ways cowtowing to those media interests he questions. If any one demographic should see this movie, it's High schoolers. They see a lot worse on the news everynight, why not allow them to see something of substance that challenges them? Oh, wait, because then they just might stop buying all of it....and that would be a terrible terrible thing, right?

As a sidenote...I was both amused and shocked to note that the bank in the opening segment was about a mile from the theater I saw Bowling for Collumbine at God Bless Northern Michigan!!

DeputyDave

I still contend that many if not most of the coman soldiers who VOLENTEERED during the Civil War did so with a extreme hatred of slavery. Many personal letters, diaries, and memiors articulate this as well as the extremly popular anti-slavery movement in the North. To say otherwise is to buy into revisionist history that has become so popular with the politicly correct. The fact that youy feel "The whole idea of a country of whites fighting over the fate of it's black citizenry is simply ridiculous" is the sad thing. I would fight for that,most of the very great country would and did fight for that.

Also no one is addressing how they would feel about the cartoon if such broad and untrue stereotypes were made about other ethnic races. There are problems with our socity but a rabid fear of blacks by whites is not one of them. I do not know a single person who feels this way, and in my job I come into contact with thousands of diverse people everyday

hgar78

your arguments are obviously backed by strong emoptions. it is simply your belief that the cartoon was "wrong on all counts". you have to look past your own political or social beliefs to truly understand it. and once again, Moore DID NOT use state that the war was fought BECAUSE of a fear of blacks! The cartoon was HIS interpretation of america's history and to an extent i agree with it. our founders did come here to escape persecution. i admire your determined belief that most white people aren't afraid of blacks but this is not the case. unfortunately, the majority of our society is afraid of blacks, hispanics, and now, those of middle eastern descent. my feeling is that it is really only blatantly obvious in smaller towns and cities. i grew up in a small city and now i live in d.c. and there is a HUGE difference! of course the population is of mixed ethnicity in both places but people in small cities, who usually grew up there and aren't planning on leaving anytime, soon have a very narrow mindset. my best firend is a sad example. she's says she's not scared of blacks but she is and she lets you know in subtle slips. she grew up in the small town. my parents raised me to not fear any race but they experienced the harsh treatment of blacks in arkansas and they lived in boston for a while. i'm rambling but my point is when you have such a limited viewpoint and are unable to truly experience the diversity of mixed races going about their business everyday then you tend to have this hidden fear of them because you don't really understand them. in a small city/town if your white, black, hispanic, asian, etc. you most likely will not mingle with the other much and your awareness of them comes from news of trouble with them. example: a black man watching the news about a white guy killing his family, the black man is going to think he's crazy and ignorant and dangerous. now depending on his mentality he will either take this as typical or simply a sad event.

this is how america works. believe it or not but as much as you disagree, it is what it is. by looking at your profile your in law enforcement and in san diego CA. my guess is you see a little of everything. s.d. CA has many races and whites are not the majority, my guess is that there isn't really a majority race. people in small areas aren't able to experience this.