Living for 32 (2010) User Reviews

Timely, almost hopeful documentary on violence

[lor_ · 24 January 2011]

Its timeliness only increased by the awful Arizona shootings, just weeks ago, LIVING FOR 32 is a plea for gun control which hopeful as it seems I concluded will have little impact in the current delusional America I live in. With Republicans now in charge of the House, it's impossible to imagine sane, reasonable, even compromise legislation being enacted against the wishes of their beloved NRA backers.

Colin Goddard is the film's face of an anti-violence campaign, spending much of his time working for the Brady Campaign to lobby folks on the Hill to tighten the gun-show loopholes and otherwise limit the access of deadly weapons with 30-plus round clips to non-law enforcement folk.

Goddard survived four shots in the Virginia Tech massacre, and he is literally living for the 32 campus people killed by the deranged shooter. The documentary indicates the loopholes and problems with mental health treatment/reporting/restrictions on gun acquisition that occurred in the VT case, very reminiscent of the Arizona campus shooter's history.

There is moving footage of Goddard returning to campus and visiting the memorial, as well as news footage recalling the fateful day itself. Kristina Anderson is another survivor who was shot 3 times and weighs in with her point-of-view forcefully, but the film stays riveted on iron-jawed, All-American boy Goddard as the face of reason.

His arguments are cogent and convincing, yet my sense of depression and dread surfaced when the opposite point-of-view (yes we live in a fake equal-time news environment) strongly promoting the notion of ARMING students and teachers with concealed weapons on campuses all over the country for self-protection was advanced as well.

We already have more guns floating around in this enlightened nation than there are people, including many varieties of arms that are preposterously powerful and meant only for carnage, not hunting or sport. I, for one, would go much, much further than Colin, and have guns relegated to collecting, just as I have so innocently collected stamps and jazz LPs during most of my life, and have the weapons taken out of the hands of the not-so-lunatic-fringe (numbering I guess a hundred million people?) who are so anxious to be ready to resist any and all authority just like the Founding Fathers did. It's time to get real.

I wish Colin luck in his personal crusade and hopefully this documentary, ripe for Oscar season recognition, will at least open a few eyes to the nonsensical tyranny imposed by the NRA. Like many other nonsensical and intractable current issues in our society, 100 years from now people will look back on a gun-totin' USA population with a "WTF were they thinking?" attitude.

Not what it claims to be

[mwd1 · 1/10 · 14 February 2011]

First, this is not an independent film made by the victim and a plucky young filmmaker. It's a propaganda piece backed by big money from the Brady anti-gun campaign, pushed by Oprah, and fast tracked to Sundance and other indie film festivals and outlets.

Second, the basic thesis is wrong from start to finish. True, it's incredibly horrible that the shooting occurred. But the film (and the filmmakers) are on an agenda of disarming honest gun owners in a the hope that it will prevent further attacks. The filmmaker, the subject of the film, and the producer are very active (in the film, and in their daily lives...check out the Facebook page for this film) in trying to disarm people with concealed carry permits from carrying on college campuses AND ANYWHERE. This would create gun-free zones, which is exactly what armed lunatics look for. Look at it this way: when a maniac starts shooting, you call the police. That is, you call men with guns and hope they show up quickly. But even the quickest police response time is too short to stop most mass shootings. Your chances of survival are much better with embedded honest citizens with guns....People who have passed background tests, and have taken classes and passed tests in safety and tactics.

Third, the film falls short even if you buy the basic premise promised in the IMDb storyline (written by the film's producer). It says "The winning combination of Colin's passion, charisma and optimism has commanded the attention of the American public...." Colin is passionate, but he is not charismatic or optimistic. He comes off as a sullen, self-righteous opportunist who admits he had no career plans after college other than "professional victim" and chose to ride that train.

The film slants undercover "operations", tugs on the heart strings in the most contrived ways, and is not the objective piece of news it is presented as. (The IMDb categories picked by the producer are "documentary" and "news".)

"Living for 32" is a well-funded, calculated piece of propaganda that is being false by passing itself off as "indie cinema" and being presented in indie cinema venues. Its only goal is to disarm honest Americans. None of its ideas will disarm the criminally insane, because criminals do not obey laws.

If someone wants to make a real "news" piece on gun violence, they should examine what makes psychos tick, what part society has in producing them, and how they can be detected and helped before they "go off." Banning full-capacity magazines will not stop killers. Banning GUNS will not stop killers. They'll still get guns, and even if they can't get guns, they'll find other ways to kill. Look at the common mass machete murders in gun-free Japan, the huge uptick in stabbings since the UK banned guns or the common bombings elsewhere in the world.

All in all "Living for 32" deserves zero stars. I had to give it one star to be able to post, but that was being generous.

Good Documentary

[Michael_Elliott · 31 October 2011]

Living for 32 (2010)

*** (out of 4)

Good documentary taking a look at the life of Colin Goddard, one of the few survivors from the 2007 Virginia Tech shootings. Goddard would be shot four times but he would thankfully live and today he fights for stronger gun control laws to keep guns out of the hands of people with a history of mental issues. The title refers to the thirty-two people who were killed at Virginia Tech that day and overall the film does a good job at showing the horrors of that day as well as what an uphill fight it's going to be to actually get a few of these laws on the book. Goddard starts off by going back to Virginia Tech and showing us where he was when the firing started and then he goes into chilling details about what he remembers from that day. After being shot four times Goddard discusses how he kept on hearing more and more shots and just by the number he knew that many people were going to end up dying. We're with him when he talks about learning who the killer was and there's a pretty creepy sequence where Goddard watches one of the shooter's videos that he left behind. I think the most entertaining and dramatic moments are the discussion of the actual shooting. The second half of the picture shines a light on the gun shows where it's rather easy to get your hands on a firearm and you really don't have to show much identification. To play devil's advocate, the only time we see these shows are when they're able to buy guns without the proper I.D.. I'm sure there were times where they were denied but that's not shown here. LIVING FOR 32 has a pure message to give and it does a nice job at that. This certainly isn't groundbreaking but it's a good little film about surviving and trying to get things changed.