United Artists | Release Date: October 11, 2002
6.9
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 219 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
155
Mixed:
11
Negative:
53
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
4
AliciaJul 26, 2007
Sooooooooooooooo overrated! Surprisingly I did enjoy parts, but only after I began to approach the 'documentary' as an entirely fictional movie. I'm an Aussie and we all 'hate' Americans but i was under the Sooooooooooooooo overrated! Surprisingly I did enjoy parts, but only after I began to approach the 'documentary' as an entirely fictional movie. I'm an Aussie and we all 'hate' Americans but i was under the impression that they're all fiercely patriotic. Michael Moore attacks his country and its institutions in a desperate attempt to be scandalous and get people to watch bowling for columbine. How could he use a tragedy like this? And even more importantly how could he receive awards for fictitious events in the category of documentary? Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful
4
ElliottAug 20, 2003
Hugely overrated. It is very poorly organized (see Village Voice review) and is less an informative documentary than one man's in-your-face opinion on gun obsession in America, told through a series of interviews with only people Hugely overrated. It is very poorly organized (see Village Voice review) and is less an informative documentary than one man's in-your-face opinion on gun obsession in America, told through a series of interviews with only people ignorant enough to make his point agreeable. It does contain many funny scenes, but really, how hard is it to poke fun at the completely ignorant??? Also, still can't believe this conquered Winged Migration at the Oscars. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
NickJun 25, 2004
Interesting...though it was later proven he cut and pasted pieces of film to make it look like Charlton Heston came to Columbine, CO 4 days or whatever after the shootings...interesting nonetheless.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
JustinP.Nov 6, 2003
Bowling for Columbine is an entertaining, thought-provoking and interesting reflection on America's obsession with guns and violence. Moore's tacit accusation that the U.S.s fascination with firearms is deadly and morbid is well Bowling for Columbine is an entertaining, thought-provoking and interesting reflection on America's obsession with guns and violence. Moore's tacit accusation that the U.S.s fascination with firearms is deadly and morbid is well made. Its easy to sympathize with Moore's disgust with the effects of America's bizarre attachment to guns, which he cleverly lampoons. But where the movie falls apart is in its superficial, shoddy and obnoxiously arrogant assumption that the director knows the obvious answers to all the complex questions the movie raises regarding violence in the US and modern society. His contention that US military action encourages American youth to murder their schoolmates is extremely dubious, but he levels it as if it were self-evident and incontrovertible. Moore makes fun of all the theories of the causes behind events like Columbine, but comfortably never puts himself on the line by offering a coherent theory of his own. It is always easy to ridicule, but difficult to propose convincing explanations and effective solutions. Unfortunately, Moore overindulges in poking fun, wallowing in his own cleverness, overimpressed with his own often very vague and questionable insights. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
JoeW.Aug 19, 2003
I don't disagree with any of the points Moore has made in the film, but I seriously don't think he works as a journalist and as a spokesperson for the truth in America. He totally screwed up the grand centerpiece Heston interview I don't disagree with any of the points Moore has made in the film, but I seriously don't think he works as a journalist and as a spokesperson for the truth in America. He totally screwed up the grand centerpiece Heston interview by nagging him too much and irritating him. And the whole deal with Wal Mart and the kids who were shot...it was pointless and anticlimatic, and he seemed to do the whole event just for his own patriotic glorification. He also cast the illusion that he walked out the bank with a gun the same day he registered, which is wrong, in fact, there is a 1-2 week waiting period before you actually get a hold of the firearm. So that also discredits his idea of the handing out of guns at the bank dangerous in the first place. He's trying too hard to be a controversial and eye-opening spinster, and obviously he got rapt attention with this film because it portrayed the ills of a society to a generally mainstream audience as opposed to small-party conspirators that have been trying to do the same for years now. Too bad Moore's ugly mug and irritable personality doesn't make him effective when it comes to the issues that really matter, just like in the Heston interview, when he really could have let the international star dig himself into a huge hole. I admit, there was some good points in the film, such as the issue dealing with fear and the news media, but overall it just felt wrong and tried to arrest the viewer with startling (and incorrect) facts. Sorry Mike. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
KostisT.Sep 16, 2003
I loved this one. The reason i give it a 6 is that moore is not objective and doesnt have the slightest respect for the "bad guys", if you can call them such. Oh and the ending was awful.
0 of 0 users found this helpful