Bowling for Columbine is more than a film about the April 20, 1999 shooting at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado. This is a documentary that examines the culture of fear and consumerism encouraged by the American media and its government. Film critic Paul Arthur quotes Sartre when he says: “all aesthetics implies a metaphysics.” He goes even further when he says: “[…] in documentary, every aesthetic also implies an ethics”. (The art of reality: standards and practices). This means that what the audience sees in any film is open to interpretation and can be understood from many different points of view. However, due to the nature of reality in documentary, what is seen must be presented carefully. Any use of framing, staging or cinematography must attempt to stick as closely to the truth as possible, because the audience is in fact convinced by the use of certain aesthetics. Moore deviates from this ethos by carefully constructing his interviews through voice-overs, dialogue and staging to sway the viewer's eye towards his side. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get the original essay The film visits an amalgamation of influential business and entertainment leaders, academic experts, and everyday people . These interviews are shot in several different ways, depending on the respondent's point of view. Those who appear to agree with Moore's point of view are photographed in a more casual conversational setting. Those who propose an opposing position are almost villainous or made to appear unintelligent through effective camera and directing techniques. One of the first interviews is with a public relations manager for a local arms factory, Lockheed Martin. Throughout the interview, a loud buzzing noise distracts the viewer from what he is saying, making it seem like what he is saying is untrue. Moore asks the questions, but we don't see him on screen at any point. On the opposite end of the spectrum, the audience is treated to an entirely different style of interview in his chat-style exchange with a Los Angeles prosecutor. They walk down a pleasant street to emphasize that "dangerous" South Central LA is not actually dangerous (Thieves). The camera does a reverse tracking shot on them as they walk through the neighborhood; it is calm and serene and the prosecutor's words are clearly understandable. The film's use of color and shadow mirrors that of The Thin Blue Line. People perceived as innocent are seen in light, neutral backgrounds while interviewees perceived as guilty or of questionable character wear dark colors and there is a use of shadows from the background that evokes the images used in horror films when the monster will soon appear. . The very tone of Moore's voice during interviews prompts his respondents to also respond in a certain way. This is particularly evident when comparing his interview with rock star Marilyn Manson and his interviews early in the film with a bank manager. The manager finds a bank that offers all new account openers a free gun after a background check. Moore goes to the bank and immediately asks for the “free gun account.” He has already established a position allowing the audience to recognize the absurdity through humorous interaction (Robbers). His rapid approach to the reception, his demanding questions and his rapid, jerky camera editing.