“Bowling for Columbine” and “Elephant”: The Problem of School Violence

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Main body
Conclusion
Works Cited

Introduction

The theme of violence is one of the most common in the world of cinematography. Still, the approach of introducing it into this or that film differs greatly. One should not forget about different genres in the cinematography industry. For example, documentary film is a very popular cinematographical genre nowadays, and there are lots of experiments that aim to combine this genre with feature film genres. It is not a secret that in documentary films their authors try to investigate this or that historical event. As a rule the author, it could be a historian or an expert in another field of knowledge, tries to investigate the reasons and consequences of this or that historical event or social phenomenon.

Main body

One of the most sensational documentary movies for the last decade was the film by Michael Moore the Bowling for Columbine about the Columbine High School massacre. Later on, Michal would create another documentary film that would make people from all over the world shudder with shock. The Bowling for Columbine was meant to investigate the problem of violence and illegal usage of a weapon by Americans which causes harm. Still, the work by Moore is addressed not only to the American people but to the consciousness of every person throughout the world. “Although the movie provides only a partial account of intervention abroad, it offers a painful reminder of the violent record of the United States around the world” (Ordonez-Jasis, and Jesus). The distinguishing feature of the film is that Michael Moore tries to conduct a deep probe of the reason which make people use the weapon at school or any other social department. The author of the movie highlights that the most terrible is the fact that a weapon becomes a new toy for children, pupils, and students. “Since 1999, deadly incidents of school violence have occurred in Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Mississippi, Alaska, Washington, Tennessee, New Mexico, Oregon, California, Minnesota and Florida” (Kondrasuk et al.).

Unlike Bowling for Columbine the director of the feature film the Elephant, Gus Van Sant offers his vision of the problem. The director does not give obvious reasons for the tragedy. Gus Van Sant offers only a pure development of the action. The Elephant is a great experiment by the director in his career: he created a hybrid of documentary movies and feature films. The experiment was rather successful, and the movie won several prizes for its creator. Some experts affirmed that the movie was a failure because there were assumptions that could explain what caused two boys of high school to commit such a great mistake. Perhaps, the director was not intended to explain the reason for “elephant” (a hint to the idiom “elephant in the room”).

“Elephant succeeds not as an act of analysis but as an act of mourning, a tone poem of grief in which the American high school–that locus of adolescent anguish and repression in so many movies–is transformed into a kind of holy site, suffused with a beauty that belongs only to youth” (O’Brien 39).

In other words, the Elephant is not a traditional feature film and approach of presenting the events which took place at Columbine High School in 1999. As well as the author of the Bowling for Columbine, Gus Van Sant did not invite famous actors and actresses to the filming. Only three professional actors participated in the Elephant. Other roles were performed by students of the Columbine High School. Moreover, the director did not change the names of students. Later Gus Van Sant told in one interview that the trick added fascination and naturalism to the movie. Exactly this approach helped the director to combine the elements of feature and documentary film that made the Elephant a very impressive and strong movie.

Conclusion

Although Gus Van Sant and Michael Moore dedicated their movies to the same problem, they highlighted different aspects of the tragedy. Of course, directors applied similar techniques, the introduction of real facts, real events, real participants, etc. Still, their movies are perceived as different works, because the authors saw different aims of their films. Michael Moore created the film to explore the essence of violence at school. Moore hinted that the essence of violence is not only in psychic of two students who killed thirteen peers. The director tried to explain that the main mistake is the drawback of contemporary society. Do not forget that the movie begins from the fragment where a man receives a fowling-piece as a bonus just for the fact that he opened a bank account. While Gus Van Sant, using the elements of documentary film addressed to the world society with the message that the problem, “elephant” is just before our eyes. Gus Van Sant meant that we do nothing before a tragedy happens. Introducing the plot without explaining the reasons Gus Van Sant calls for people to act but not watch without any reaction on what is going on.

Works Cited

Kondrasuk, Jack N., et al. “Violence Affecting School Employees.” Education 125.4 (2005): 638.

Ordonez-Jasis, Rosario, and Pablo Jasis. “Bowling for Columbine: Critically Interrogating the Industry of Fear.” Social Justice 30.3 (2003): 127.

O’Brien, Geoffrey. “Stop Shooting: Geoffrey O’Brien on Gus Van Sant.” Artforum International 2003: 39.

Click Here To Order Now!

“Bowling for Columbine” and “Elephant”: The Problem of School Violence

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)