I’m not going to give much in the way of my own review on Zeitgeist here, but rather provide some links and point out the dearth of critical movie reviews of such an internet phenomenon. Loose Change has a whole slew of “debunking”/point by point “critiques”, etc. in the blogosphere, so why not something similar for Zeitgeist? If there is such a thing I haven’t run across it yet. Feel free to add a link here if you are aware of such a critique.
Anyway, my current one paragraph review of Zeitgeist might read as follows. Watch it, research it, come to your own conclusions based on your research. Tell others to do the same. If you think the movie is badly flawed, see if you can make a better one covering the information and which is covered in Zeitgeist.
Okay, now let’s take a quick look at some “reviews”
Jay Kinney reviews Zeitgeist, the Movie Okay review, raises legitimate points, but seems to slightly miss the point of Zeitgeist, IMO, which I believe is to offer a fairly encompassing 2 hour picture of “where we are now”. Thus, the movie brings a lot of material to the table, and rightly so. And the author of the movie Peter Joseph appears to be working on a line by line interactive transcript (only part 1 is available so far), which would appear to a be potentially a good start towards addressing the sources issue.
Utne Reader via The Stranger- pretty obviously a hit piece, rather than a review. But it’s a mention of the movie en passant, so I’ll mention my thoughts (in my comment after that blog entry linked above) on it here in passing.
Globa and Mail- Rejecting conspiracy thinking keeps it alive and well (which much be why we here so little about this movie, eh, eh? wink, wink, nudge nudge, knowwhatImean?) – Hit Piece
The funny thing about this stuff is that it’s all been thoroughly debunked for years. Everyone from Scientific American to Popular Mechanics have produced reports puncturing the central claims of the 9/11 theory, and when you look gullible next to Popular Mechanics, you know you’re in trouble.
Priceless. Yeah, Popular Mechanics. That strawman “debunking” is still being cited as authoritative. That was so, like 2004, or whenever. Is the author of this piece, Ivor Tossell,
actually even online? Ah, well. I shouldn’t resort to ad hom. Sorry.
Irish Times- Zeitgeist: the nonsense
Um, I think we can safely infer “hit piece” from the title alone, but read it (and a reply to it) in full (apologies for the formatting) here if you must…
and then here are a couple more:
Mythology and Iconoclasm of Zeitgeist The Movie (looks like a decent review, based on a skim.
and Boise State’s independent newspaper has ‘Zeitgeist’ raises real questions
That’s all I’ve got for you kids- on the most watched (for months now) Google video, Zeitgeist. Not much.
Unless you want to include pieces of mine such as a further research links for material in Zeitgeist post or Zeitgeist- what can we do?, etc. which aren’t really reviews.
January 17, 2008 at 6:27 pm |
[...] Wikipedia.org . O verbete do filme (Inglês) Wikipedia.org . O verbete do filme (Português) WeCanChangeTheWorld . Lista de críticas do filme RealidadeOculta.com . Site sobre Conspirações AlwaysBeReady.com . Argumentos Cristãos contra [...]
January 19, 2008 at 5:25 am |
All I have to say is amazing video really changed my perspective
February 6, 2008 at 2:21 am |
Well done, Peter. Probably one of the most important, ‘must see’ doci’s to come along in years.
Any chance ‘Z’ will make it to mainstream Broadcast or Distribution?
February 6, 2008 at 7:36 am |
Hey Earth Party,
I’m not Peter Joseph. I hope it might have a chance of that, but I have no inside knowledge of such possibilities. I’m “only” a blogger who likes the movie.
February 6, 2008 at 1:38 pm |
Okay, people are free to have their opinions on Zeitgeist and the world and whatever. But, that doesn’t mean I have to approve their comments.
If you want to try rewording and/or souring your comment, Heathen Gliebe, you might at minimum refrain from mentioning “swimming pool and brothels” at a famous concentration camp.
You can believe or not believe what you choose, but I tend to eschew publishing unsourced/poorly sourced crap. Even if it is someone else’s words. It’s my blog. If you don’t like the rules I play by, I suggest you start your own blog.
February 7, 2008 at 1:51 pm |
Yes, I’m a big bad censor, LOL. The problem is, Heathen Gliebe, not that I’m afraid of being called anti-semitic. That’s an old hat smear which is about as frightening to me as being called a censor by you is. The problem is I’ve gotten sick and tired of reading crap like the type you want to post here. If you wanted to talk specifics, name names and cite genuine sources- Rothschilds, PNAC, Richard Perle, Marc Grossman, AIPAC, JINSA, whatever… I’d have no problem with that. But no, the evil Jooows are responsible for everything wrong with the world (according to what I’m reading from you). I’m not wasting my time with BS like that. Been there, done that more often than I care to.
Anyone who wants to find rants like yours can look elsewhere. They’re not hard to find. Anyone who wants to do further research and reading on specifics and issues with actual decent links, might do well to start with the Pilots for 9/11 Truth library.
http://z9.invisionfree.com/Pilots_For_Truth/index.php?showforum=26
Don’t bother replying. It won’t get approved. Save yourself some time.
February 8, 2008 at 8:49 am |
Take your crap elsewhere, troll. The internet’s a big playground. When you are unable to publish your BS anywhere on the net, I’ll be woried about the freedom of speech of your kind. Freedom of speech also means I get freedom of approval. Or not. Here- just for you…
http://www.webcitation.org/5VSHkA8B2
Also, since you seem so confident that Ron Paul is in favor of anything and everything being published anywhere anyone like yourself wants it to be, I suggest you take yourself on over to an official RP site which allows commentary and see how your screeds fly over there. In other words, piss off.
February 8, 2008 at 1:38 pm |
Dear readers (and trolls, current and future),
I’m not the best moderator in the world. But I do (usually) attempt not to feed the trolls. It only encourages them. But, with my very own first troll on my own personal blog, I had to have a bit of fun first. Hope you understand…
http://www.webcitation.org/5VSHkA8B2
anyway, on controversial topics which attract internet attention (such as 9/11 Truth, Zeitgeist, etc.) trolls are an inevitable part of the landscape. They come in all different types. Further reading on trolls may be found from links here:
http://dkosopedia.com/wiki/Troll
You may also find the 25 Rules of Disinformation useful reading, if you haven’t read them already. They predate 9/11, in case you were wondering…
http://www.911review.org/Wiki/RulesOfDisinformation.shtml
Anyway, that’s all the further I’m going with this little series of comments here. Anyone want to talk about Zeitgeist (nontrollishly, of course)?
March 10, 2008 at 1:14 pm |
hey wecanchangetheworld
great blog
i loved this doc. Especially for the construction of it, i think it was amazing how much emotive content he got across. i dont see anyone posting comments on this just its accuracy. which is fair. yet it should be noted its well made too.
i just wanted to post my admiration. i hope too,for a future of peace.
steve
September 20, 2008 at 2:46 pm |
I wont say to much on Peter’s “Theory” of Religion. I saw nothing to prove my beliefs in Christianity, Jesus Christ were fraudulant. I will give him a thumbs up on the whole Government portion. I know first hand how our Government is corrupt. At the present time, a friend of mine has been battling a 5 yr law suit with the Fire Dept. whom burnt down her home out of a personal vendeta. Blew it up. The very people that are suppose to fight this, created it. Two did go to jail, one got off, he was the look-out guy and supposively didnt know what was going on…YAH RIGHT!…SOUND FAMILIAR! But HEY!, lets put that lady down the street in jail for 6 months because she harrassed someones dog! TOO MUCH! Another fraudulant system, INSURANCE. State Farm tried to blaim the fire on the HOME OWNER! claimed they burnt down their own brand new 8600 sq ft mansion they were about to move into in 3 weeks. State farm has put this family through the ringer. Now they they know they DIDNT burn their own home down, they are STILL fighting them with the claims of “insurance fraud”. 5 yrs! 5 flippin yrs! this has been in suit. And not one dime paid to this family that lost EVERYTHING. They cant even get home owners insurance because State Farm has them BLACK BALLED to where no one will accept them. SLAVERY! not to just the BANKS, GOVERNMENT, but INSURANCE as well. So why is it everyone is in such a hurry to run to America???? If “America” is as good as it gets….SCARY! “Land of the free”? They have changed every flipping thing in the Constitition, when are they going to get with the times and change that LOGO??????
September 26, 2008 at 6:05 pm |
Tim….Going to school can also change your perspective, and you can actually read and learn from credible sources. Watching one movie should not change your entire worldview. Not only that the movie makes no sense. It’s like 3 movies in one. What does Christianity have to do with WTC which was attacked by extreme muslims. And what the Muslims believe does not match in any way the sun-god explaination in the beginning. Not only that many of his religious explainations (or assertions) are incorrect. Horus was not believed to rise from the dead it was his father Assur. It is confirmed by many theologians and religous historians that Jesus was NOT BORN ON DEC. 25TH. By now this should be common knowledge. This fact total breaks down his entire theory at the beginning of the movie. This film maker is just picking out facts from thin air after a good weed smoking session, and not even coherentely piecing them together. If one fact presented in a documentary is untrue (which there are many false statements) then the entire documentary breaks down. Not even legitimate, intelligent athiests would use this film to prove any of their points. OPEN YOUR EYES PEOPLE AND WAKE UP!!!
September 27, 2008 at 2:54 am |
Hey Bon,
Where’d you come up with this idea/standard?
“If one fact presented in a documentary is untrue (which there are many false statements) then the entire documentary breaks down”
If a documentary/logical argument is such that if one failure in a logical step (untrue statement) makes the whole documentary (argument) fail, then the argument/documentary is like a chain- one link fails and the whole chain goes. If, on the other hand, the argument/documentary is structured like a cable or a rope instead of a chain then one or more strands can be weak or fail and the rope or cable can still hold some weight. Not as much as if every strand holds full weight, obviously, but the entire rope or cable won’t fall apart due to weak strands.
Your contention appears to be that documentaries must be chainlike in nature. I don’t think I’ve ever seen such a thing, personally. Scientific theorems and mathematical/logical proofs, yes, but documentaries? Not so much…
By this line of reasoning, assuming one had a totally (demonstrably) true documentary in every detail- call it documentary A- any number of untrue documentaries could be derived from some the facts presented in documentary A- mixed in with one or two demonstrably false statements. What bearing would those untrue documentaries have on the truth of the true statements contained within them? None whatsoever.
Since you appear to have drunk the Kool-Aid on the “Muslim extremist” theory of WTC demolition, it’s not surprising that you didn’t get the connection between the 3 different parts of the movie- “we’ve been lied to”.
October 1, 2008 at 3:34 pm |
At the end of the day, we’re all screwed.
October 13, 2008 at 2:23 am |
For those who didn’t connect the dots (for whatever reason) and saw a disjointed, incoherent “three separate stories” piece, which seems to be quite a few on numerous review sites, blogs etc. CONTROL THROUGH MANIPULATION IS THE COMMON THREAD. But these are my dots, yours are your own.
October 25, 2008 at 12:44 am |
Critical analysis of the movie please. Anyone, feel free to jump in. Please refrain from usual posted subjectivity. Monica, thats hilarious by the way.
October 28, 2008 at 3:30 am |
In my personal opinion and view, before I accidentally found the movie in the youtube, I started to realize something was wrong but that all started from one source, religion.
My previous enforced faith upon me without ability to critically think for myself but do what you’re told to do ‘dogma’ did not allow me to become who truly I am. A human being with a conscious mind that is able to critically and analytically think for myself. I felt the “church” put a cap on my brain and did not allow me to expand my ideals, until it basically snapped off, I started to think more and read more various books and sources, hence all things slowly make sense with correct thinking, but remember think outside the box too, that is one of the most important things.
Zeitgeist is a good movie in my opinion, basically a short version of long story in general for people who don’t have “time” because they are still are enslaved to the society’s manipulative belief system. The most important thing is to discover yourself, your inner true self, find your own peace within you and then you will realize the truth.
Zeistgeist has a second movie released now, it is better and makes sense how the current system is formed by monetary means. Remember do your own research and always challenge your leaders, never be the sheep.
You can choose;
1. Find the truth and seek the truth that could set you free.
2. Find the truth and deny it, for you are afraid.
3. You do not want to know the truth and you do not care or want not to know.
Choose and pave your destiny for I already had chosen mine.
January 31, 2009 at 5:18 am |
I’m glad I came across this! I’m actually in the middle of writing a series that debunks part one of the movie right now. I also want to invite as many fans of the Zeitgeist as I can to my blog to challenge my claims and research. If I’m wrong, I want to know! My blog is at http://againstheresies.wordpress.com/ if you’re interested in checking it out.
February 18, 2009 at 1:57 am |
The only problem I have with Addendum is the fantasy civilization whose presentation seems to be the apex of the movie, if not what a good portion of its argument is based on. I understand that automation of everything and careful management of the world’s resources is ideal to being sustainable, but the movie ignores the resource importation that is so characteristic of civilization, and which is the reason why civilization is unsustainable in the first place. Also ignored is what to do if other cultures don’t want to move towards this fantasy civilization. The perspective this civilization sprouts from is also flawed, as it requires that all other people of the world are willing participants. What happens, then, when we encounter a culture that does not want the same thing we want? What has usually happened when this occurs?
March 7, 2009 at 7:30 am |
This is a review that appears to be fairly thorough (http://www.conspiracyscience.com/). I believe the creator of the movie knew fool well that most people would take it as fact and not spend the time to research it!!!!!! Any media presentation of this nature that does not have experts with differing opinions giving both sides of the argument becomes a huge question mark. Most people do not have the time to research how factual the information is. So doesn’t the movie do just what it says a few world leaders are doing: manipulating us, manipulating us, manipulating us, manipulating us? Sorry, I couldn’t resist using one of the techniques used in the movie.