Planetarion Forums

NotLife · 6 Mar 2003, 19:20

Have just seen the movie.

This was just the opposite of how USA reflects their country through movies, media etc.

I must say I dont like usa much better now.

and NRA: what the hell are they talking about, need more weapons so that the people can protect theirselve.
From who? Well clearly from other people that have weapons.
No weapon, no shooting.
So what should be done here is to remove the guns!

Strange country I must say.

Maybe Bush should use his strength on his own country, and then try to save the world.
Think about it: how much money are they using on the Irak war?

mpr0733 · 6 Mar 2003, 19:29

are we to

A: discuss the film
B: discuss Irak
C: teach you how to think before you post

This isn't up to you.

Nodrog · 6 Mar 2003, 19:30

obligatory link to "funniest political commentary ever"

NotLife · 6 Mar 2003, 19:32

Quote:

Originally posted by mpr0733
are we to

A: discuss the film
B: discuss Irak
C: teach you how to think before you post

This isn't up to you.

This isnt a discussing post,
just me sharing my thoughts.

and I am crazy, so I wasnt expecting you people to understand.

ok then I go for choice A.
Lets discuss the movie

MrL_JaKiri · 6 Mar 2003, 19:34

Quote:

Originally posted by NotLife
This isnt a discussing post,
just me sharing my thoughts.

and I am crazy, so I wasnt expecting you people to understand.

ok then I go for choice A.
Lets discuss the movie

Hey you! This is general discussion not general comments!

Sandsnake · 6 Mar 2003, 19:41

Micheal Moore had it right when he named his book "Stupid White Men." He just got the premise wrong. It should have been a an autobiography with "man" instead.

Sensationalist tripe with about as much factual backing as the fake moon landing craze. Bowling for Columbine wasn't much better, since it's based on the idea that if guns were illegal, this never would have happened. It completely disregards the fact that every gun used was obtained illegally.

<insert the obligatory "I lived in the Littleton, CO area when the whole thing happened so I'm intimately aware of the details" comment>

Vanilla · 6 Mar 2003, 19:57

Quote:

Originally posted by NotLife
Have just seen the movie.

and NRA: what the hell are they talking about, need more weapons so that the people can protect theirselve.
From who? Well clearly from other people that have weapons.
No weapon, no shooting.
So what should be done here is to remove the guns!

It was rubbish.

Guns are needed. There will always be hundreds of thousands of illegal guns in the states...and no one in their right mind would use a legally registered gun to commit premeditated crime.

Look at england. We have no guns. Police and the bad guys do.

6 Mar 2003, 19:57

it was a fantastic movie. specially the lockhead martin guy and the sequence with its a wonderfull world.

and the greatest part was moores conversion wih the lunatic who got arrested and then released

Moore: do you think everybody should have nuclear bombs?
lunatic: no, there should be restrictions
Moore: oh so you believe in some restricions?
Lunatic: well, theres wackos outthere(end of scene)

I laughed alot after that interview.

mpr0733 · 6 Mar 2003, 20:02

I think the film provides an alternative perspective on the contemporary America in that it seeks to expose it's less propagandated sides. The film, in my opinion, is fascinating in that Michael Moore manages to succesfully interview scores of people ( Charlton Heston excepted maybe) of extremely different backgrounds. He blent it into a mix of alternatingly funny, sad, touching and appalling scenes that climaxes towards the end with the interviewing of mentioned movie star.

The fact that the writer/producer is of American origin only adds to the film, 't was good to hear.

9/10

ps
First DVD I've ever bought after having seen it in the local underground cinema.

Judge · 6 Mar 2003, 20:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Vanilla

Look at england. We have no guns. Police and the bad guys do.

Factually incorrect.

I have "Guns" as you quaintly put it.

2 Rifles to be exact and a 12 bore Shotgun

All of which are legally held with the correct fire arms certificates.

mpr0733 · 6 Mar 2003, 20:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Sandsnake
Micheal Moore had it right when he named his book "Stupid White Men." He just got the premise wrong. It should have been a an autobiography with "man" instead.

Sensationalist tripe with about as much factual backing as the fake moon landing craze. Bowling for Columbine wasn't much better, since it's based on the idea that if guns were illegal, this never would have happened. It completely disregards the fact that every gun used was obtained illegally.

<insert the obligatory "I lived in the Littleton, CO area when the whole thing happened so I'm intimately aware of the details" comment>

I think you missed the point Michael Moore was trying to make. If I understood correctly, he was mostly blaming Politicians and media of constantly trying to frighten the population to vote on them/watch their television channels.

Nodrog · 6 Mar 2003, 20:10

Quote:

Originally posted by m.ar.d
Moore: do you think everybody should have nuclear bombs?
lunatic: no, there should be restrictions
Moore: oh so you believe in some restricions?
Lunatic: well, theres wackos outthere(end of scene)

Thats an absolutely idiotic argument. Nuclear bombs arent even remotely comparable to firearms.

Quote:

Originally posted by NotLife
and NRA: what the hell are they talking about, need more weapons so that the people can protect theirselve.
From who? Well clearly from other people that have weapons.
No weapon, no shooting.
So what should be done here is to remove the guns!

So is that.

Ive not actually seen the film, could someone summarize his main arguments?

mpr0733 · 6 Mar 2003, 20:25

Quote:

Originally posted by Nodrog

Ive not actually seen the film, could someone summarize his main arguments? [/b]

It's not so much as if he points out causes of the violence problems that plaque America. It's more of a quest to just seek and explore a fair few contributors. The film is so constructed that the interviews are put in a more or less chronological sequence. As people provide different arguments and reasons along the way, he too seeks answers (and questions) in the directions mentioned.

Gun availability, gun ownership promotion, media and programs concerning violence, politicians, poverty and so on.

Get that Kazaa engine running incely!

Kegluneq · 6 Mar 2003, 20:41

Quote:

Originally posted by mpr0733
Get that Kazaa engine running incely! [/b]

Done, some time ago. It's a very interesting (and entertaining) film, but it was very one sided, and cunningly edited. I actually agree with almost all of what he said (and was said), but had too many weaknesses to be a 'good' documentary. It works as a counterbalance to typical US propaganda, though.

Interesting how Marilyn Manson was one of the saner interviewees, although I wasn't really surprised.

6 Mar 2003, 22:07

Quote:

Originally posted by Nodrog
Thats an absolutely idiotic argument. Nuclear bombs arent even remotely comparable to firearms.
ive not actually seen the film, could someone summarize his main arguments?

eh you didnt see the movie.
It wasnt Moores argument that was funny . it was funny that the lunatic idiot who he interviewed ( who also was arrested because he was best friends with timothy mcveigh ) said there should be restrictions because there were wackos out there.( He was a very big wacko himself)

Nodrog · 6 Mar 2003, 22:22

Quote:

Originally posted by m.ar.d
eh you didnt see the movie.
It wasnt Moores argument that was funny . it was funny that the lunatic idiot who he interviewed ( who also was arrested because he was best friends with timothy mcveigh ) said there should be restrictions because there were wackos out there.( He was a very big wacko himself)

Oh I see, fair enough then.

queball · 6 Mar 2003, 22:24

Timothy McVeigh was perfectly justified to bomb people as revenge for the terribly handled Waco incident.

Sandsnake · 6 Mar 2003, 22:28

Quote:

Originally posted by queball
Timothy McVeigh was perfectly justified to bomb people as revenge for the terribly handled Waco incident.

tis a shame that wasn't why he did it. (not that it would still have been right)

HobbieRogue4 · 6 Mar 2003, 22:45

I enjoyed the movie for the perspectives of (what were shown) Canadians and the Matt Stone interview. Those two had the biggest impact on me if anything.

The Charlton Heston interview at the end was not unexpected; it played out pretty much how they usually do with public figures of that nature.

NotLife · 6 Mar 2003, 22:49

it says alot about the attitude to a country when you get a rifle for opening a bank account,
how can a bank account be linked to a rifle?

Here in my country(Norway) you really dont
associate bank and rifles.

MrL_JaKiri · 6 Mar 2003, 22:50

Quote:

Originally posted by NotLife
Here in my country(Norway) you really dont
associate bank and rifles.

Don't you have armed robbery there?

NotLife · 6 Mar 2003, 22:52

Quote:

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
Don't you have armed robbery there?

if you attempt to think real hard, u will understant.
Not now, not tonight, but maybe tomorrow.

Nodrog · 6 Mar 2003, 22:52

Quote:

Originally posted by NotLife
it says alot about the attitude to a country when you get a rifle for opening a bank account,
how can a bank account be linked to a rifle?

Here in my country(Norway) you really dont
associate bank and rifles.

I've heard from many sources that that scene was "made up", and the footage was heavily edited (ie, they didnt actually give him the rifle when he opened the account). Its one of the most critisized scenes in it.

NotLife · 6 Mar 2003, 22:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Nodrog
I've heard from many sources that that scene was "made up", and the footage was heavily edited (ie, they didnt actually give him the rifle when he opened the account). Its one of the most critisized scenes in it.

mm that I would not know of, but why would he do that?
Do you have some evidence? (not a sarcastic question)

MrL_JaKiri · 6 Mar 2003, 22:56

Quote:

Originally posted by NotLife
if you attempt to think real hard, u will understant.
Not now, not tonight, but maybe tomorrow.

Stop being condescending, chuckles.

NotLife · 6 Mar 2003, 23:00

Quote:

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
Stop being condescending, chuckles.

well dont give me moron sentences

Quote:

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
Don't you have armed robbery there?

MrL_JaKiri · 6 Mar 2003, 23:07

Quote:

Originally posted by NotLife
well dont give me moron sentences

That was a 'humerous misinterpretation'

Nicole · 6 Mar 2003, 23:08

Quote:

Originally posted by NotLife
it says alot about the attitude to a country when you get a rifle for opening a bank account,
how can a bank account be linked to a rifle?

Here in my country(Norway) you really dont
associate bank and rifles.

Bull****. I can't even get free checking out here. Say whatever you want about our gun policies, but suggesting that we have banks generous enough to give away rifles is absurd. I don't care what that movie said.

Getting guns (legally) is a lot more difficult then anti-gun people would have you believe. I myself cannot legally own a gun, and I'm of age. I know plenty of other people who are in the same boat. I know we have some ****ed up gun laws, but anti-gun people make it sound like you can walk into a grocery store and buy an uzi. As much as Michael Moore would like to make himself out as champion of the people he is just as guilty as the politicians he criticizes of using sensationalist propaganda to further his own means.

NotLife · 6 Mar 2003, 23:11

Quote:

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
That was a 'humerous misinterpretation'

and my sentence was a sequel to that.

MrL_JaKiri · 6 Mar 2003, 23:13

Quote:

Originally posted by NotLife
and my sentence was a sequel to that.

Don't be stupid.

NotLife · 6 Mar 2003, 23:15

Nicole
thats the impression I got after watching Bowling For Columbine

G_frog · 7 Mar 2003, 00:02

Quote:

Originally posted by Nodrog
I've heard from many sources that that scene was "made up", and the footage was heavily edited (ie, they didnt actually give him the rifle when he opened the account). Its one of the most critisized scenes in it.

Those criticisms didn't make sense. in fact the scene was specifically intended to pre-empt such things as far as i could see.

Quote:

Originally posted by Sandsnake
Micheal Moore had it right when he named his book "Stupid White Men." He just got the premise wrong. It should have been a an autobiography with "man" instead.

Sensationalist tripe with about as much factual backing as the fake moon landing craze. Bowling for Columbine wasn't much better, since it's based on the idea that if guns were illegal, this never would have happened. It completely disregards the fact that every gun used was obtained illegally.

That's unfair. Stupid white men contained substantive arguments, even though many were buried in rhetoric.

Bowling for columbine doesn't take that premise at all, moore attacks the idea of firearm regulation actually preventing gun crime. He explicitly states that he can't think of a solution.

7 Mar 2003, 15:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Nicole
Bull****. I can't even get free checking out here. Say whatever you want about our gun policies, but suggesting that we have banks generous enough to give away rifles is absurd. I don't care what that movie said.

Getting guns (legally) is a lot more difficult then anti-gun people would have you believe. I myself cannot legally own a gun, and I'm of age. I know plenty of other people who are in the same boat. I know we have some ****ed up gun laws, but anti-gun people make it sound like you can walk into a grocery store and buy an uzi. As much as Michael Moore would like to make himself out as champion of the people he is just as guilty as the politicians he criticizes of using sensationalist propaganda to further his own means.

Q. Is that bank that hands out guns for real?
A. Yes. North Country Bank (with branches throughout Northern Michigan) offers you a wide choice of guns when you open up a certificate of deposit account. In effect, they are giving you all of the interest the account will earn in advance in the form of a gun. The bank is also an authorized federal arms dealer so they can do the quick background check right there at the bank. I put $1,000 in a long-term account, they did the background check, and, within an hour, walked out with my new Weatherby-just as you see it in the film. (I did have a choice of getting a pair of golf clubs or a grandfather clock, but they didn’t have either of those hanging on the wall like they did those three rifles). I learned about the bank’s gun offer from an ad in the local paper that showed a gun across the top with the heading, " More Bang for Your Buck" from North Country Bank. I still have the account and the gun to this day (though I plan to legally "auction" off the gun for charity, and creatively have it destroyed-more on that later!)

source: http://www.bowlingforcolumbine.com/a...q.php#bankguns

Haer · 7 Mar 2003, 17:33

I dont see why people see this as an "Anti gun film". He explicitly states that they have just as many Guns In canada, and yet under 100(I think?) Gun murders a year, compared to ~11,000 in the US.

His main point is that the Media in the US is a lot more sensationalist/fear mongering than in other places(He focus's on Canada).

Certainly, I think there was *some* creative editing, but in general its not a bad film, definately funny in places.