1/10
Moore's specious arguments ruin what could have been a good film...
2 April 2006
I really liked "Bowling for Columbine," but this film starts out badly and just gets worse with the unfounded logic of Moore's emotionalism. For example, before the title even comes up, he asserts that the claim by Bush's cousin at Fox News that Bush won the presidency caused the other networks to automatically change their calling of the election for Gore (why would that happen? it makes no sense...), and then asserts that this somehow cemented the election for Bush (how could that possibly happen?). It goes on down hill from there...

Whereas some of Moore's films really poignantly detail the matter that he is working with, this flops because it is basically a film about blaming and accusing George Bush for everything and going beyond the boundaries of logic to do it. I am not a big fan of Bush, but Moore's claims just took me right out of the film. I am sure that if you hate George Bush like so many do you will love the film, but if you are independently minded (and surely if for some reason you actually like Bush) you will not appreciate the film.
22 out of 47 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed

 
\n \n \n\n\n