zeitgeist
I recently watched the 2nd installment (Zeitgiest: Addendum) which inspired me to try and find some valid criticisms of the movies because there were some ideas in the follow-up that paralleled and expanded upon themes that i have been working on.
I look for criticisms because both movies have an air of propaganda (hell.. the 2nd one is blatantly a recruitment film for their little movement/project) and have claims that seem close to the truth but have the ring of exaggeration.
So far I haven't found much.. just a lot of blogs and forum threads with people having flame wars. Some of the more promising sounding links lead me to christians saying variations of "nuh-uh", and overall just getting hung up on the first part of the first movie.
No one seems to care about the underlying message. Even the supporters aren't talking about the things i'd expect from people inspired by the content of these movies.
But i think that is a product of the style and content of the first movie. Which i found entertaining and contained some interesting perspectives that i thought were inventive and clever.
The second one is where i really feel their purpose comes through. I'd almost say that the first film was like a primer, the initial jolt to get us hurtling back towards setpoint. (Which of course will cause some overshoot.. but that's what subsequent revisions are supposed to correct [which i don't fully agree with.. but it would seem that the situation is dire enough for them to resort to such tactics])
The first tries to break down the audience's potential blind loyalty to the 'official accounts' to three of our major controlling institutions so that it will be in a better position to absorb the message in the 2nd. I think the problem is that, for those who didn't really buy into those institutions, it [the first movie] had a super additive effect, making them irrationally anti-status quo. It had too much of a conspiracy theory flavour. Painting this mysterious 'they'. That there was this grand orchestrated plot to control every facet of global affairs.
The 2nd seems, to me, to have a more reasonable target. The system(s) itself/themselves having built-in maintaining mechanisms. And it also felt more like more than one person worked on the film as opposed to it being a video essay made by a lone conspiracy theorist
The whole thing requires much more investigation.. but certainly can't be dismissed, because one way or another, people as a whole need to find a new way of conducting ourselves. We may argue about the finer details, but most would agree that the patchwork systems we've been riding are reaching the end of their effectiveness.
What i want to know is, where can I find people who are actually seriously/objectively fact-checking these movies and not emotionally responding to it due to the threat it represents to their worldview?
I look for criticisms because both movies have an air of propaganda (hell.. the 2nd one is blatantly a recruitment film for their little movement/project) and have claims that seem close to the truth but have the ring of exaggeration.
So far I haven't found much.. just a lot of blogs and forum threads with people having flame wars. Some of the more promising sounding links lead me to christians saying variations of "nuh-uh", and overall just getting hung up on the first part of the first movie.
No one seems to care about the underlying message. Even the supporters aren't talking about the things i'd expect from people inspired by the content of these movies.
But i think that is a product of the style and content of the first movie. Which i found entertaining and contained some interesting perspectives that i thought were inventive and clever.
The second one is where i really feel their purpose comes through. I'd almost say that the first film was like a primer, the initial jolt to get us hurtling back towards setpoint. (Which of course will cause some overshoot.. but that's what subsequent revisions are supposed to correct [which i don't fully agree with.. but it would seem that the situation is dire enough for them to resort to such tactics])
The first tries to break down the audience's potential blind loyalty to the 'official accounts' to three of our major controlling institutions so that it will be in a better position to absorb the message in the 2nd. I think the problem is that, for those who didn't really buy into those institutions, it [the first movie] had a super additive effect, making them irrationally anti-status quo. It had too much of a conspiracy theory flavour. Painting this mysterious 'they'. That there was this grand orchestrated plot to control every facet of global affairs.
The 2nd seems, to me, to have a more reasonable target. The system(s) itself/themselves having built-in maintaining mechanisms. And it also felt more like more than one person worked on the film as opposed to it being a video essay made by a lone conspiracy theorist
The whole thing requires much more investigation.. but certainly can't be dismissed, because one way or another, people as a whole need to find a new way of conducting ourselves. We may argue about the finer details, but most would agree that the patchwork systems we've been riding are reaching the end of their effectiveness.
What i want to know is, where can I find people who are actually seriously/objectively fact-checking these movies and not emotionally responding to it due to the threat it represents to their worldview?