Reply #113: So because the movie treated Heston "shamefully", it is anti-gun?

[0rganism]

Mr. Heston is ONE MEMBER of the NRA -- albeit he was in a leadership position at the time of the Columbine massacre. The NRA itself is composed of a subset of America's gun owners. Showing segments that are perceived as anti-NRA or anti-Heston would hardly make the film anti-gun.

That said, Mr. Heston's leadership role pretty much opens him up to inquiry of the sort Moore did. If he speaks for the NRA at massive rallies and in national ad campaigns, there is absolutely no reason he cannot speak for the NRA in person. Now whose fault is it that Heston comes across as a feeb? Should Moore have forgone or cut out interviews with the man who led the NRA during the Columbine tragedy because he's got Alzheimer's?

By the way, "first half" plus "remaining 25%" = "three quarters". Did you take a break during the second half of the movie to buy popcorn and use the john? Cos there was some very critical material in the parts prior to Heston, I'd hate to think you missed it.

One important element Moore explored at about that time was the news media's promotional fascination with violence and fear. The message they were conveying was more shameful than anything Moore did to Heston: "be afraid, afraid to go outside, afraid of strangers, afraid of not watching the TV, afraid of the poor, afraid of minorities, afraid of the weather, afraid of damn near everything that doesn't come in a three-piece suit with plenty of hairspray."

Moore's film is about how a culture of fear itself creates periodic upheavals of irrational violence. It is not an anti-gun film.