Wednesday, November 12, 2003
It's like a National Holiday here in our apartment, a new Dirtbombs album just came out!
Sometimes I think guns are wrong and that an endorsement of gun control is justifiable and necessary, but then I see a film like Bowling for Columbine, made by someone who has no idea what documentary filmmaking is all about and carefully edits speechs and statistics in order to cut things in a clear black and white manner.
Basically, I think that Charlton Heston can hang himself on his own words, the guy has alzheimer's and is obviously not able to argue at the pace of super genius and master orator, Michael Moore. Did Moore really need to edit speeches, put Heston on the spot and make him look like a racist (carefully overlooking anything Heston did for civil rights in the 60's)? It seems like the only people Moore could find to argue in favour of less gun control were the psychotic, the paranoid, and the feeble minded. I suppose that's what the NRA is made of.
It's pretty obvious from the beginning that Moore has an agenda, a thesis, America is in love with their guns, so much that it blinds them to the realities of gun use, and he uses his film to support that thesis. Moore through use of ridicule, misinformation (the Lockheed factory outside Columbine wasn't involved in weapons production), exaggeration (his version of a ghetto in Canada looks nothing like East Hastings) to make his case and seemingly ignores any arguments or information to the contrary. That's not necessarily wrong, but it doesn't sit well with me.
How can you show the common joe that he's been lied to all his life by the "Right Wing" when you're using the exact same tactics? When people realize they've been lied to through propaganda and manipulation, they rightly react with anger and outrage, which is good for the "other side". It's unfortunate though that Moore uses propaganda and manipulation in order to reveal the lies and show people the light. Any thing he might have said that had any relevance loses credibility in the eyes of Joe and Jane Doe, the moment any manipulation on his part is revealed.
I suppose it's silly for me to expect everything to be pure and free of taint (ha taint...sorry), but if Moore is going to place himself on the side of the righteous, well then he's got to do a better job of presenting "the truth" (which I suppose is never objective and is always someone's interpretation of the...).
I suppose it's silly to get upset about a movie that came out over a year ago, but I started thinking about it today when I was checking this out :
Gun Smarty
Sometimes I think guns are wrong and that an endorsement of gun control is justifiable and necessary, but then I see a film like Bowling for Columbine, made by someone who has no idea what documentary filmmaking is all about and carefully edits speechs and statistics in order to cut things in a clear black and white manner.
Basically, I think that Charlton Heston can hang himself on his own words, the guy has alzheimer's and is obviously not able to argue at the pace of super genius and master orator, Michael Moore. Did Moore really need to edit speeches, put Heston on the spot and make him look like a racist (carefully overlooking anything Heston did for civil rights in the 60's)? It seems like the only people Moore could find to argue in favour of less gun control were the psychotic, the paranoid, and the feeble minded. I suppose that's what the NRA is made of.
It's pretty obvious from the beginning that Moore has an agenda, a thesis, America is in love with their guns, so much that it blinds them to the realities of gun use, and he uses his film to support that thesis. Moore through use of ridicule, misinformation (the Lockheed factory outside Columbine wasn't involved in weapons production), exaggeration (his version of a ghetto in Canada looks nothing like East Hastings) to make his case and seemingly ignores any arguments or information to the contrary. That's not necessarily wrong, but it doesn't sit well with me.
How can you show the common joe that he's been lied to all his life by the "Right Wing" when you're using the exact same tactics? When people realize they've been lied to through propaganda and manipulation, they rightly react with anger and outrage, which is good for the "other side". It's unfortunate though that Moore uses propaganda and manipulation in order to reveal the lies and show people the light. Any thing he might have said that had any relevance loses credibility in the eyes of Joe and Jane Doe, the moment any manipulation on his part is revealed.
I suppose it's silly for me to expect everything to be pure and free of taint (ha taint...sorry), but if Moore is going to place himself on the side of the righteous, well then he's got to do a better job of presenting "the truth" (which I suppose is never objective and is always someone's interpretation of the...).
I suppose it's silly to get upset about a movie that came out over a year ago, but I started thinking about it today when I was checking this out :
Gun Smarty
