Fantastic!

Absolutely the worst movie.

A story that's too fascinating to pass by...

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

I'm generally an admirer of Michael Moore's work, but his film-making IQ was at a low ebb when he did Bowling for Columbine. I'm not going to spend too long expressing my disgust with Moor'e sleazy "got-ya" attack on Charleston Heston; by posing as an NRA member he cynically took and advantage of an aging man's mental confusion as Heston succumbed to Alzheimer's disease. Moore creates ridiculous fantasies, as he suggests Canadians don't bother to lock their doors at night (if Moore seriously believes that break-ins and burglaries don't occur often in Canada, he should try living in Vancouver's DTES or the North End of Winnipeg. Another ridiculous assumption is that Canada is not a nation of gun owners.Instead of doing such ridiculous comparisons of the US with Canada Moore should have chosen Japan as his field of study. Japan has the lowest rate of gun crime in the world. In 2014 there were just six gun deaths, compared to 33,599 in the US. What is the secret? If a Japanese wants to buy a gun in Japan the applicant must attend an all-day class, take a written exam and pass a shooting-range test with a mark of at least 95%. The applicant must also undergo mental health and drugs tests, a criminal record check and police will look for links to extremist groups. Then authorities check the applicant's relatives and work colleagues too. And as well as having the power to deny gun licenses, police also have sweeping powers to search and seize weapons. That's not all. Handguns are banned outright. Only shotguns and air rifles are allowed. In most of Japan's 40 or so prefectures there can be no more than three gun shops, and Japanese gun owners can only buy fresh cartridges by returning the spent cartridges from their previous visit. THAT's why Japan has near zero gun crime. Japanese culture is at the apex of human civilization, and they wisely shield their society from the influx of riff-raff from less enlightened parts of the world.

When an American is asked why she thinks there's less crime in Canada, the answer is 'fewer blacks'. Moore counters by revealing that 31% of the Canadian Polulation is non-white. Maybe, if you count Native population as well as Asian and Latin American population.The facts: Preston, in the Halifax area, is the community with the highest percentage of blacks, with 69.4%; it was a settlement where the Crown provided land to Black Loyalists after the American Revolution. And... Halifax had the highest rate of gun-related violent crime of all major Canadian cities in 2012, according to Statistics Canada. According to the 2011 Census, a total of 945,665 Black Canadians were counted, comprising only 2.9% of Canada's population, and this figure includes Black Canadians of mixed race.What do you say to that —Michael Moore?

Bowling for Columbine (2002): Dir: Michael Moore / Featuring: Michael Moore, Charlton Heston, Marilyn Manson, Matt Stone, George W. Bush: Brilliant documentary about gun possession in America. Title represents the fact that two teenagers who open fired in a Columbine school were earlier bowling. Michael Moore takes viewers on a dark and sometimes comical journey to discover compelling and disturbing facts. We learn that America is driven by fear sparked by media. Moore interviews rocker Marilyn Manson whose music was blamed for the Columbine incident. He also embarks upon the influence of entertainment and violence and interviews Matt Stone, one of the creators of the popular Canadian cartoon South Park. George W. Bush is also featured for mockery and regardless of one's view, Moore still makes his vision funny. Charlton Heston also appears in his pro gun rallies and Moore addresses the fact that his rally took place a week after the shooting of a six year old girl. Moore also makes discoveries in Canada and other countries about guns. He even joins two Columbine survivors in their approach to K-Mart, which sold the bullets embedded in their bodies. The film contains Moore cynical approach that is branded with his humorous insight and opinions. The film requires us to reflect upon life and how it can end with the senseless pulling of a trigger. Score: 10 / 10

This movie is probably, filmmaker Michael Moore's most famous film. The documentary explores the reasons of gun violence, by looking into the gun culture of the U.S. In doing so, he learns that the conventional answers of easy availability of guns, violent entertainment, violent national history, & even poverty are inadequate to explain this violence when other cultures share those same factors without the equivalent carnage. In order to arrive at a possible explanation, Moore takes on a deeper examination of America's culture of fear, bigotry and violence. Furthermore, he seeks his own investigation and confront the powerful elite political and corporate interests in fanning this gun culture for their own greedy gain. With his signature sense of awkward humor, the activist filmmaker pretty much change, how documentaries are shown. Love him or hate him, he has been the most influential documentary filmmaker of the past 30 years. Gone are the days of monotone narrating lectures. In are the more playful, and colorful documentaries full of funny cartoons, cool graphics to transfer information and perspective, catchy music tunes, pop culture references, and celebrity talking heads interviews. Very entertaining. The documentary also has a lot of heart & sad moments, includes a number of disturbing scenes to illustrate its points, such as footage of real-life people being shot, gun suicides, assassinations, battle footage, and so on. Perhaps most terrifying, the movie includes security camera footage from the Columbine High School massacre. These scenes are brief, but effectively horrifying. It can be hard to watch, at times. Moore's techniques and message are so powerful and persuasive and his scruffy, paunchy everyman image so likable that it won the Academy Award for Best Documentary in 2003. Still, the movie is without its faults. I'm not a ring-wing propagandist, but I found a lot of doubt in Moore's credibility information. Moore was often called out for his somewhat deceiving practices. He does like to edit some of the interviewee's responses to make it seem like they agree with his statements. A good example of this is the sequence with South Park co-creator Matt Stone. Stone was just there to talk about high school life at Columbine, but the movie made it seem like he was for 'Gun Control' by twisting his words, and making it seem like Stone help created the animation sequence in the film about the history of guns. Clearly, South Park Studios have no hand whatsoever in making the segment and Stone thought the cartoon that Moore presented was complete BS. This disagreement, cause Matt Stone and Trey Parker to put a negative caricature of Moore in 2004's Team America: World Police as retaliation. Moore's investigation was supposed to carry out ostensibly to uncover subversive activities, but actually felt more like harassment and undermined those that of different views than Moore. Most of them, don't really have much of a connection to the problems of gun violence. A good example of this is when Moore tries to link television producer Dick Clark with really irrelevant evidence to the murder of a six-year-old by a six-year-old, because the boy's mother worked at one of Clark's restaurants in a welfare-to-work program. Yes, Clark did kinda dodges Moore's questionings, but I really doubt Dick Clark is to blame for this tragedy. He didn't really hand the gun to the kid and force him to kill the other child. After all, it's more like the gun owner's fault. Sad, to see the movie makes Clark look like the devil. Another bad judgment call by Moore, was his relentless questioning during an interview with a clearly memory-impaired Charlton Heston whom by this time, was suffering from both cancer & Alzheimer. Moore clearly took great advantage of Heston's weakness to make Heston look like a fool. When Moore asks Heston why he continues to taunt communities that just underwent gun-related tragedies by holding his ridiculous rallies, Heston couldn't provide any answers. The reasons for this is that Moore implied that the National Rifle Association deliberately scheduled its annual conferences to exploit the Columbine shootings, when the truth of the matter is the conference had been scheduled months or years in advance. Moore also accused Heston of holding an NRA rally right after a shooting in Flint; however, the footage he used was of Heston visiting the city almost a year later for a campaign event. Throughout the movie, Moore strung together snippets from several of Charlton Heston's speeches to make them sound like one arrogant speech. Moore has really gone to great lengths to misleading the audience. Another good example is where Moore goes to a bank which was giving away a free rifle to anyone who opened an account with them. What Moore didn't show, was the bank actually handed out, was an certificate for a free rifle at a gun store down the street, where the store performed the same background checks and waiting-period requirements as if a customer had walked in to buy a rifle with cash. There are way too much countless amounts of distorted information, throughout the documentary to noted, here. It's really up to the audience to decide what is truth and what's false, but I do advice people to do their research when going to see this movie, because this film clearly need further investigating. While, his research is up to debate and there are some good points that Moore brings up. My favorite is Louis Armstrong's "What a Wonderful World" playing over footage of the atrocities by various US-backed regimes. To his credit, he's not exactly anti-gun – or doesn't seem to be; rather, just like me, just curious about gun-culture and believe a little gun-control is needed. Overall: I give Moore credit for this film as gun control not an easy topic to talk about. I just wish, his facts were a little more solid. Sadly, it was not.