Bowling For Columbine

746 Words3 Pages
Bowling for Columbine: Movie Analysis Causation is a direct link between two events, when "A" directly leads to or causes "B". Correlation is quite the opposite of that, in which event "A" may possibly indicate event "B". In the movie, "Bowling for Columbine", director Michael Moore argues that there is a direct, causational link between the Columbine school shootings and many world and national events. I would instead argue that this is untrue, the school shooting and the events Moore blames the event on are only related by a correlational link at best. Moore, who is a cinematic genius at skewing footage to fit his ideas, has taken far too many liberties with his footage used and jumped to far too many conclusions. His work in the movie, Bowling for Columbine, makes the normal viewer support his conclusions, many of which seem similar to adding 1+1 and arguing that it makes 11. From a critical standpoint, although many of his points seem correct on a moral scale, quite a few more of his allegations can be refuted with common sense. One of these such allegations stems from his belief that one of the boys involved in the Columbine massacre grew up in Michigan, before moving to Littleton. Moore argues that he may have been exposed to these groups, along with their positive regard to weapons and explosives. He attempts to link the infamous Oklahoma City Bomber, who was exposed to and linked to the Michigan Militia, to the boy, implying that the idea to participate in the school shooting would have come from exposure to the Militia. This link is extremely weak at best. There is no direct evidence that either of the boys was active participants, or even affiliated with the militia. For Moore's point to be valid at all, the militia would have had to be a much larger factor in the idea of the school shooting. Moore then attempts to draw a parallel between two more

More about Bowling For Columbine

Open Document