11-14-2007; Assignment

My criteria to evaluate a documentary are the following.

1. It should clearly focus on an issue(s).
2. It should have a theoretical structure.
3. It should consider a counter argument(s).
4. Its conclusion should be supported by various objective evidence.
5. It should suggest a potential solution(s).


Evaluation of "Bowling for Columbine" through these criteria is the following.

First, the documentary implicitly focuses on a problem of school violence but it is relatively vague because it focuses on so much guns or explosions but not explicitly focuses on the Columbine incident.

Second, it dose not seem to have a theoretical structure, but just shows sporadically some interviews regarding the problem of guns or explosions.

Third, it demonstrates some counter arguments such as conflicts and interests of gun control.

Fourth, it dose not have any conclusions and potential solutions to resolve school violence, rather just introduces some opinions and suggests some problems of gun control.

In conclusion, I think that the documentary have good view in that one of the school violence is related to guns or explosions, but it is not convincing because it dose not examine other possibilities such as social rejection and psycological problem.