Michael Moore: The 1999 Columbine Massacre

466 Words2 Pages

Michael Moore, the American filmmaker, explores the circumstances that led to the 1999 Columbine massacre, by revealing the amount of guns owned and the strikingly high rate of homicide in America. At the 75th Academy Awards Michael Moore received an Oscar for best documentary. But did he deserve the Oscar for best documentary?

Moore’s argument is that gun control is a major problem in the US. This is shown by the ease in which the two boys who committed the Columbine school massacre obtained guns to kill their classmates. He proves this by going to a bank and claiming a free gun just for opening an account.

The use of editing in the documentary both influences the audience’s view point and adds to the overall message of the film. When filming the documentary Michael Moore uses techniques such as music, which is uplifting, visuals such as using black & white screens to show old footage, and sequences such as the short animation at the start of the documentary that is documenting the history of the NRA. The reason Moore uses these techniques is to persuade viewers to believe his argument. …show more content…

Moore explores both sides of the argument by talking to people who both own guns for ‘safety reasons’ and those who are strictly against guns. In an interview with NRA leader Charlton Heston, Moore shows him a picture of a 6-year-old girl who was shot by a young boy in her class. He asks why Heston held a

Pro-gun rally in the city the young girl was murdered in just days after the incident. This causes viewers to be angered by Heston’s actions and believe Moore’s argument is the better one. Moore does this to shows a wide range of view and