Michael Moore’s ‘Bowling For Columbine’, possessed its title not only based on the infamous high school massacre, but also on the frequent change in mood from start to finish. It toyed with your emotions like a bowling ball – picked you up, rubbed you soothingly then rolled you around on the cold, hard ground. Humorous, yet sorrowful, the documentary addressed the controversial issue of gun violence in both America and Canada. Moore wanders through the streets of the two countries, to search for the answer of whether there is a particular reason why the gun mortality rates in Canada is much less than the States (while both countries are equally obsessed with firearms) or the Canadians simply just do it better? The opening was certainly not what I’d expected for a documentary that addresses the said issue. It started off with sketchy …show more content…
When one American claims that it’s because “Canadians don’t watch as much violent movies as Americans do,” a horrendous image of a man getting shot in a movie follows right after. Another one claims, “There's no poverty in Canada like there is here in the States”, but there is in fact more unemployment in Canada than in the US according to the Mayor of Sarnia (Canada). Moore’s voice-over concludes that “the Canadians are pretty much like us,” referring to the fact that “Canada has a diverse population–13% non-white” and that Canadians also have easy access to guns. Moore alternates between the two simultaneous scenes to prove wrong the people that he interviews in a comedic way. This film technique further emphasises the fact that people in America refuse to make connection between the amount of guns they own and the murder rates. So if black people, unemployment and violent movies are off the track, what other factor makes Canada (theoretically) a safer country when it is pretty much a clone of