Well "Bowling for Columbine" has been proven to be very Fallacious.
Printable View
Well "Bowling for Columbine" has been proven to be very Fallacious.
Actually it wasn't so you lose.
I actually liked Bowling for Columbine. I was shocked as i only rolled my eyes about three times instead of the 500 i expected. The reviews of Farenheit 911 though have been less than expected. Someone said something like "It has lots of new information in it only if youve lived in a cave in Afganistan for the past three years" or something close to that. And yes i do know it did very well at the Cannes film festival but it could have been a sheet of paper with Bush Sucks on it and could have done as well there. Moore belongs with the Al Frankens, Al Gores and James Carvilles of the world. Pushed off to the side until the democrats need someone to make a stupid rant and take one in the ribs for the team. Just like Limbaugh and O'Reilly are for the republicans.
Bowling for Columbine, because it is Michael Moore's work, implies a hell of a lot of things. It isn't, however, wrong, because those implied things are just that; there aren't any lies, you have to draw your own conclusions.
http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html
If people take it as fact it is quite wrong. Many people do not go home after a movie and look up websites saying what is wrong in the movie they watch. When one says they are making a documentary, it is expected to be truthful, with Bowling, it was not the case.
I leave you with this a definition of the word Documentary
"A work, such as a film or television program, presenting political, social, or historical subject matter in a factual and informative manner and often consisting of actual news films or interviews accompanied by narration."
That takes away the directors ability to selectively edit, as Moore is known to do.
I would offer that theres probably no documentary in history that fits that description if you consider selective edits as something that disqualifies a film. Any photograph, any image, purposefully edited or not has a bias created by the taker. Inaddition, every documentary would be 100s of hours long if you didn't cut down and interviews and other points.
Tijay you know as well as I do that Moore did more than just a little "Slanting" in that movie.
Have you ever seen it?Quote:
It isn't, however, wrong, because those implied things are just that; there aren't any lies, you have to draw your own conclusions.
Yes.
Then how the hell can you tell me Moore doesn't attempt to lead the viewer in the wrong direction multiple times?
The cartoon where the NRA guy gives the KKK guy gas for his cross, the Charleton Heston interview, the Charleton Heston speeches, even the Titan missiles.