3 - Bowling for Columbine

by Julian, Amanda, and Evan 

Bowling For Columbine, 2002, Michael Moore, 119 minutes

Guns. they've been around for many years and are now almost a part of American culture. but is America really in control of their gun situation?  this is what Michael Moore, the famous documentary filmmaker sets out to discover in the documentary "Bowling for Columbine."  we see how his persuasive ability can change the opinion of many by the way he presents his documentary films. this is what we call rhetoric, the art of persuasion. we also compared it to the film "Fahrenheit 9/11" and explained how rhetoric is present in that film too.

“Bowling for Columbine” is a documentary film that was created to promote an issue that affects many people and their lives.  This is the issue of gun control; which is a huge problem in the states.  Michael Moore, the director of this documentary, shows us how easy it is for a person to get their hands on a gun. He even brings us to a bank in America where almost anyone can receive a free gun when opening an account with the bank and how one can purchase ammunition while getting their hair cut. This is in a country where guns are the reason for over 11 000 deaths each year! I wonder why..

Michael Moore wanted to show the world why guns shouldn’t be so easy to come by. He told us a story about a six year old that found a gun in his uncle’s house and brought it to school. What happened next affected many people’s lives especially that of the other six year old that got shot and died.  The shooting at columbine high school was also an eye-opener to how easy the access of guns are; three shotguns, and a machine gun were used in the assault; most of the bullets were purchased at the local K-Mart down the street.

Moore set off to uncover what the reason was for all these Americans having the need to own a gun and found that it was mostly because Americans lived in fear. He compared the media coverage in Canada and the states. He realized that what was being covered in American media was a whole lot of violence and in Canada, well not so much.  That’s when Moore decided to ask a few Canadians if they were scared, most of them answered no and said they didn’t even lock their doors at night. This is mostly because we don’t have many guns here in Canada. So is Michael Moore right when he says that our society would be better without guns?

The topic for that week was rhetoric, which is pretty much the art of persuasion.  There are three forms of address which are used to convince an audience.

Logos is using evidence and facts to build an argument; like when Michael Moore compares gun deaths in America to other countries in the world.  I was shocked to see how high the states were, compared to the rest of the countries.

Ethos is to believe someone because of who they are; a perfect example of this is how Charles Heston can influence the Americans to buy guns, just by the way he preaches them. Everyone believes what he says about guns and how Americans “need” them to keep safe, only because of his social status as the president of the NRA.

Pathos is using people’s emotion to change their view on something; this is what Michael Moore used as a basis for the documentary.  The whole film is focused around the school shooting that happened at Columbine high school where many kids died.  This appeals to our emotions and changes our view on gun control making us realize how relax it is that two teenagers can get access to these automatic weapons used to kill many students.

Gun Facts 

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/united-states

"Fahrenheit 9/11"

To say that “Fahrenheit 9/11`” is one sided is an understatement. In his 2004 film, Michael Moore provides us with the “facts” about George W. Bush, the war on Iraq and how Bush is a corporate puppet. Throughout the film, Moore throws facts and statistics at the viewer that sometimes seem out of place. The main focus is on how Bush does not take his role as president as serious as he should. This movie focuses on the affects of 9/11 and the paranoia caused because of it. Due to all the interviews and clips shared on the media, Many civilians in the United States were left in fear after the tragedy on September 11,2001. They did not feel safe, and who can really blame them. After 9/11, Iraq was then attacked by the U.S. troops because Bush sent them. Many people question if the war between the U.S. and Iraq was necessary.  Moore interviewed a woman who lost her son to the war, and she even questions if the war really did help or not. Moore based the film on Bush, and how he could have taken immediate action in order to save his nation before it became out of hand. He shares footage on the numerous vacations Bush took while he was president and even a few interviewers asked him why he was taking so much time off instead of working. A tool that Moore used in “Fahrenheit 9/11” is conspiracies such as the allegations Moore makes, saying that the Bush administration helped get the Bin Laden family out of the united states after the twin tower bombings on September 11th 2001. Another aspect of the movie that struck me as odd was the fact that Moore is very selective of who he chooses to interview. For example, when he wants to make a point that the war in Iraq shouldn’t have happened, Moore interviews a well spoken soldier who has similar views to his own, but when he looks at the other side of the story (Bush) he makes Bush and his supporters seem as stupid as possible.  celebrity that was interviewed to defend the Bush administration was Britney Spears, which as is plainly obvious, is no expert on politics. It seems that in both “Bowling for Columbine” and “Fahrenheit 911” the filmmaker only wanted to let the world know his point of view rather than let the viewer see both sides of the story and decide for themselves.

Both “Fahrenheit 9/11” and “Bowling for Columbine” used background music that at times seemed over dramatic or completely comical. For example, when Moore interviewed the mother who’s son had died in Iraq, there was sad music playing to let us know how to feel about the scene. In my opinion, it just seemed as though Moore was trying to manipulate his audience to share his point of view by playing with the background music and by giving us “facts”, which were mostly just portions of the truth used to play with our feelings. This can be seen as both effective and ineffective depending on the viewer. Personally it makes the scene seem less serious and I believe it hurts the credibility of the movie a bit. 

Rhetoric is a concept that Moore uses in both Fahrenheit 9/11 and Bowling for Columbine as well as many other of his films. He manipulates logos, ethos and pathos to get his point across and to convince the audience. 

What Moore is very good at is presenting evidence to prove his cause (logos), throughout both movies, he presents the viewer with information about gun violence, gun ownership, poverty etc. 

Ethos, is when Moore interviews celebrities about the topic at hand, which can be very effective to prove a point like in “Bowling for Columbine” when Moore speaks to Charlton Heston about gun rights, or when Marylyn Manson is interviewed. The problem is, he also interviews people who have no buisness being interviewed, like Britney Spears in “Fahrenheit 9/11” who says she trusts the Bush administration.

I believe that both “Bowling for Columbine” and “Fahrenheit 9/11” were made as a criticism of American society. The idea that Moore wants to get across is that the American people are being manipulated into thinking that things are a lot worse than they are in some respects, gun violence, and to try and get the people to see things in a different way. 

2 - Waltz With Bashir

Introduction

Hello classmates, Here is our team’s blog on the two films we’ve been given to reflect on and briefly describe. The first is Waltz with Bashir, which was the first film seen in class about a war veteran on a journey to regain lost memories from the 1982 invasion of Lebanon. Then there is Persepolis, which is also animated. This film was given to us to watch out of class and relates to Waltz with Bashir in the sense of war, revolution, animation and the consequences of war. Both films are the directors taking us on a journey of self-discovery and to salvage their past. These two films take art and animation into a different world, showing that animation is no longer meant for children’s cartoons. A bold move but so very suitable for these two personal stories.

﷽﷽﷽﷽﷽﷽﷽﷽ff his waltz and the gunfire one vie.is actually a real eventthat happenn becuase hat the movie is real. In Waltz withreal life footage it catches the viewers attention t at the views its that illusion becuase hat the movie is real. In Waltz withWaltz With Bashir, Ari Folman, Israel, 2008 (90 mins)

Waltz With Bashir is a film by Ari Folman and it is based on the Israeli war and the invasion of Lebanon in 1982. This film shows us Ari as himself, an ex-soldier who is suffering from post-dramatic stress, and he is trying to gain back the memory of what happened during the war specifically Beirut, and wants his viewers to see the after effects war can produce on a place, and the people who live there. The movie is a journey throughout the memory of this soldier Bashir who was part of the Israeli army during the Lebanese war.  Throughout the documentary he goes through a series of interviews with his fellow veterans friends who had served along- side him throughout the war. It starts when a fellow ex-soldier describes a recurring nightmare he’s been having about the time they spent in battle, this jump starts Ari’s own memories. He then goes on a journey of self-discovery to try and get back these repressed memories. Why his friend has these continuous nightmares while he remembers nothing. The film presents a highly personal point of view through Ari’s past experiences and those of his allies. 

Folman has a unique way of presenting the issues to his views. There is one scene that really shows the viewer how unique his approach really is, that scene consists of a naked woman swimming from the sea to coast that he was on having a “prewar party”. The naked woman comes from the sea and rescue’s Basir from the war and swims away with him. That is a unique dream Basir has while passed out from sea sickness. This dream is unique because it shows the viewer that Basir does not want to go to war he wants to flee and not worry about risking his life. This naked woman is shown as a godly figure, which saves Basir from going to war. Folman creates such an allusion of fear and adrenaline immediately in this film. The opening scene consists of 26 dogs running at you in a dream scene, which leaves everyone to wonder “why”. It catches your attention right away and leaves you wanting more. The film is mostly animated except for at the end which is in my opinion the most striking part of the whole film. “Waltz with Bashir” does not stay animated the entire time, Folman at the end cuts to real live footage that shows the viewer the after effects war achieves, this makes the viewer so aware of the significance of the war. Folman in this seen uses realism. Which is shown by the sadness, destruction, and confusion of the woman in the scene. This particular scene jumps out at the viewer and is very strong because the documentary went from one big illusion/animation to it getting very serious in one shot a real life experience with real people, real tears, and real emotions. The end is shocking, you leave the film upset but with a new view of the truth of the invasion of Lebanon. The film may be considered bias because it’s only shown the Israeli side of things but it never the less true and it’s from the soldier’s point of view. The whole point of this film is to show the viewers the reality of war, and the affects it has on the people involved.

                In class this week we talked about Realism, and how to perceive reality. How can we perceive reality? Realism is the tendency to view and represent things as the really are. Like many paintings in the early arts, they may emphasize on revealing an ugly truth. Like this film, the message is not something everyone wants to see, but needs to know. If you look at a cube from the top it might only look like a 2D square, but if you look at it from another angle it’s a full 3D cube.  In waltz with Basir from the point of view from the soldiers when Frenkel takes the MAG and starts shooting in every possible direction from the point of view of the soldiers taking cover it looks as if he is dancing the waltz. That scene falls in place with our “perceiving reality concept” because the soldier perceived him as dancing the waltz that’s how they wanted to show the reality of Frenkel saving the day. One soldier even says it was “As if he wanted to show off his waltz and the gunfire“. It might seem crazy to us seeing a man with a MAG shooting and dancing the waltz maybe even a bit made up, but it is all shown on how you perceive the situation, the soldiers could have said that he crazy for a brief moment and started to shoot at all the buildings. The soldiers on the other side, could have seen it as a beautiful thing. From what we are used to “the Waltz” is a dance and dancing in the western world is seen to be beautiful and graceful, and that’s how the soldiers saw Frenkel at that moment. 

We also talked about illusions like when the Lumiere’s filmed the arrival of the train and it looks as if the train is going to roll right out of the screen and hit you. These concepts connect with the film because in Waltz With Basir the illusions become reality. It must sounds very cliché but it’s true, the whole illusion of the messier in Beirut with all the animations and all the cartoon effects only seems to make you think it was made up. That illusion soon becomes reality, once Folman cuts the seen and shows you real people and real cries of sadness and voices. One illusion that Folman does is he takes a non-fictional film like this and passes it off to a certain extent as a fictional film. He does that by having most of the movie animated so that the viewer does not get the feeling that the movie is real. In Waltz with Basir that is what actually makes the movie pop out at the views it’s that illusion because once Folman cuts to the real life footage it catches the viewers’ attention and makes them reflect on the film, and how it is actually a real event that happen in the world not just a made up fiction movie.

Persepolis 2007, 96 minutes, France Marjane Satrapi and Vincent Paronnaus

Marjane is the main character in Persepolis, she was born in Tehran in an upper middle class family. Her childhood story takes place during the Islamic revolution while her country was at war. The film shows us a young girl growing up from child, to teenager to an adult in Iran in the middle of a political crisis. Marjane is at young age when we are first introduced to her. Later on in the movie Marjane goes to college in Europe, she finds a place to live with the new people she has meet. She also finds her first love. But the relationship doesn’t last long. College isn’t such a success for Marjane and ends up going back to live with her parents. Marjane is very close with her grandmother. She supports Marjane through the whole movie with advice and encouragement.

I found the movie had a good plot and story line. The structure was solid and well-presented and easy to follow. It gives you a chance to learn about terrorism and the people of Iran as a civilization who want peace and freedom. The movie plays with realism, one of the ways the director shows realism is through the Iranian war. The war had the major role in this movie. During the war, the people of Tehran were frighten and really only wanted peace and freedom. There were riots in the streets, the people were always fighting. He presents the emotions very well, it gave the audience a clear idea on how it impacted the country. Marjanes character is very quiet, she keeps a lot of her opinions to herself and she never seems to be happy but always wanted to go out and protest for everything she believed in but her parents never allowed her because they feared for her safety. At that age it’s hard to express yourself, Marjane was confused because she didn’t know why people were dying. Marjane keeps most of her emotions inside and I believe that’s what made most of her character.  

Because the director used animation it was much easier to express her thoughts and dreams. It was also more convenient to the filmmaker, it took less time to make the film and much easier to explain the major parts and themes of the movie. The animation was very simple, mostly black and white and simple illustrations. But this let the viewer concentrate on the important issues. There were parts in the film that animation helped portray, like the scene were Marjane speaks to God in her bedroom. Another example is the war itself, it would have cost the author much more money and time to reenact the Iranian war with the bombing and explosions. If he didn’t make the movie while using animation, the story could have been told a different way. It could have gave the audience a different view on the movie. But by making the film an animation he had full control on the emotions the atmosphere the culture. I believe the animation had a large influence of the success of this film.

Growing up Marjane was like any ordinary teenager, peer pressure, falling in love and the love of French fries. The most surprising part of the movie is when Marjane asks her parents if she can live with them again. I thought she would change her ways going back to her parents, but she doesn’t. She seems lost in life, not sure what to do anymore. Her parents try to encourage Marjane to do something with her life but she refuses to take no action. It surprised me how the movie ended. We see Marjane leaving her family at the train station to finally start her life after experiencing one of her friends dying. Her friend dies from falling off a roof. Marjane was with her friends at a party one night until the police showed up. Marjane’s friends ran to the roof to escape. They had to jump off the roof to another one, but one of her friends didn’t make the jump. All throughout the movie we learn about the revolution, religion and symbols of capitalism.

A personal reflection of the two films

                 These powerful films have many things in common, but the main idea is that they both want to get across a solid message about the war in Israel and Iran and how most of the world doesn’t recognize it. How it affected everyone from the soldiers who fought in the war, to the little girls and their families who lives were deeply affected.  By using animation to get across these important matters lets the issues become real, but not too harsh. The thing with animation is that you can be taken out of the observable world. In each film there are a series of scenes that could not have been done if it were an alive documentary. When Marjane speaks to God in her bedroom or when the giant blue woman emerges from the ocean in Bashir, which is a huge advantage these filmmakers had to portray their stories and helps get across the power of illusion. Both filmmakers use their own voices and names to present their personal stories, it really lets you have confidence in the films in general because it isn’t an actor hiding behind a made up role, instead it becomes very real. Memory is the central theme explored by both of these filmmakers, but what makes them different is their relationship to the truth. Can we really trust our dreams and memories? These films really show us that when we try to describe a thought from the past, the memories can become manipulated by time, especially if the events were painful and traumatic.

What we can learn in these films is the history and personal experience behind these wars and massacres and the people involved may repress these memories but are never truly forgotten. That maybe all these innocent deaths were to revenge the assassination of the leader of Lebanon. The young men who went to war only wanted to do the right thing and serve their country as best as possible, following orders. The young soldiers didn’t really have a solid grasp at what they were doing. And years later all the horrible nightmares of the horrific events come back. It seems like Ari Foldman shows himself in the film because he wants to take some responsibility and comfort his mind a little. In Persepolis you learn about the people in Iran, how they want and deserve peace and freedom just as much as anyone. The animation lets the war and violence and bloodshed seem lighter, but it was actually preparing the viewer for the final scene. The sound of the women screaming, the piles of dead bodies and the soldiers being there all through it. This makes it real, it challenges our assumption of the world. Not only that but when people think of Iran they think of Oil and communism, but after watching Persepolis you can now challenge to your assumptions and see the good it has instead of the corrupt. Assumptions are what we believe about the world, and they can often be mistaken. The main idea is that they are trying to get across an anti-war message. For us to understand and the filmmaker to explain the massacre that happened. It also teaches us that animation is not only limited to happy children’s films, it can also send a very powerful message to the viewer about war and political crisis.

Personally, I find it very easy to connect with Marjane as a girl. The film “Persepolis” is basically a story of self-discovery, (excluding the war and the revolution) which makes it easy for pretty much anyone to relate to it.  I was always high spirited child and constantly asking adult’s answers to questions I didn’t understand. But her journey from child to adolescent is what really gets you involved. From teenage angst, depression to falling in love for the first time.  These two films have changed my perspective on the words “war” and “Iran”, now when I think of war I always think of the people who were damaged by it, I think of illustrated animation and power. When I think of “Iran” I now think of a people united, love, family and French fries with ketchup.

The two autobiography documentaries were just so well put together, and let you totally get lost in their world. There are so many war films created now and people have it set in their mind what to expect. These films completely change what you thought about anti-war documentaries by intriguing the viewer from the very beginning with dark and simple animation, getting their serious message across, all while making the films easy and enjoyable to watch. It should let us all feel really lucky to live in such a peaceful country with no war to shape “us” as a people.   We would recommend anyone to watch them more than once.

Sources

Persepolis: http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/persepolis-2008

Waltz with Bashir: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1185616/
http://www.theguardian.com/film/2008/nov/21/waltz-with-bashir-folman