The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #63137   Message #1025852
Posted By: Strick
28-Sep-03 - 02:32 PM
Thread Name: BS: RE-visiting 'Bowling for Columbine'
Subject: RE: BS: RE-visiting 'Bowling for Columbine'
Thanks for the vote of confidence, Guest. I've now rented and watched the movie. With a transcript of Heston's speech in front of me. (The first time I ever been exposed to anything remotely related to the NRA since I don't have or use guns.) So at this point I'm entitled to express an opinion, right? Or is still trolling so long as someone's point of view differs from yours? Perhaps, it's just a personal dig, Oh Nameless One?

Here's my problem. Once you open this door you have to accept that it swings both ways. A hypothetical: a Viet Nam vet filmmaker wants to make a film about Viet Nam war protesters. He starts with a clip with that famous still photo of "Hanoi Jane" getting off the plane in Hanoi. He takes a speech she gave in Califorina at roughly the same time and edits it together making it seem that not only is she even harsher in her criticism of the war that she's giving a vividly anti-American speech from the capitol of an enemy power. He never really says that, he just makes it look that way with his editing. It's OK from his point of view because everyone knows, well, everyone he knows knows, that Jane Fonda is anti-American. Her "born-again" Christian thing is just a sham.

The facts are identical, so explain it to me. At what point does a filmmaker stop producing documentary and start producing propaganda? Or again, is the difference between the two merely what you agree and disagree with? Integrity is irrelevant so long as it supports a message you support?